~
e
of . the Idea of HistoIY •
ID
••
tIqUlty V Gerald A. Press
The idea of history. and especially the Klea that history is goal-directed, has figured prominently in Western thought since the Renaissance. providing the conceplUal foundation for philosophies ami theologies of histor)' as well as of a varlety of social theories. Therefore an extensive schola rly literature has come into existence in the past century which discusses the origin and early history of the idea. It is widely held that in ancient Creek and Roman thought history is understood as circular and repctiti\'e (a consequence of their anti-temporal metaphysics) in contrdSt with Judaco-Christian thought, which sees history as linear and unique (a consequence of their messianic and h~nce radically tcmpond theology).
This account of the idea of history in anttquity exemplifies a more general vlew: that the Craeco-Roman and Judaeo-Christian ('uhures were fundamentally alien and opposed cultural forces and that. therefore. Christianity's victory over paganism included the replacement or supersession of onc intellectual world by another. In this study Dr. Press shows thal COntrary 10 this belief there was substantial rontinuity between "pagan" and Christian ideas or history in antiquity, rather than a striking opposition between cydic and linear patterns. He finds that the foundation of the Christian view of history as goal-direcled lies in the rhetorical rdlhcr thall the theologiCdl motives of early Christian writcr!.. Cerald A. Press is a member of the Western Cuhure Program at Stanford University .
MCG Il.L·QUU:N'S STUD I E.S If\; T H E H ISTO RY OF I DEAS
Richard 11. I'upkill . Editor
-<,
THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE IDEA OF HISTORY IN ANTIQUITY
Gerald A. Press
McCill-Queen's Universi ty Press Montreal & Kingston . London · lthaca
Cl McGill-Qucc ..... UnNcnlty Prc" 1982 IS8N 0.7".5-1002-8
Leg ..1 deposit 4th quuu:r 1982 BiblioLh~ue nalion .. lc du Quebc<: Printcd in Can..d.. Reprintcd 200' McGm-Qu«n'. UniW!:nity Press ..cknowledge. thc .upporl of the Canld.. Council for the Arts for our publishing prognm. We also uknowledge the Iinanci ..1 support ofllle GoW!:rnmem olCanada through the Book Publi$hing Indu$lry ~lopmcnl Prognm (IPtDP ) lor ou r publilhing acLhitics.
Press, (;(,rodd A" {(;(,r.dd Abm), 1!H.5The d~lupme"t of the klc:a 0( hlnory In antiquity
(McCiIl.Qucen'l sLudlelln the hl$lory of ideal, ISSN 07l1.()9g!l ; 2)
Bibliognphy: p. Indudel index, ISBN 0.71'.5-1002-8
I . HiO\ory · Phil<»ophy, 2, HiltOry, Ancicnt· Hhtoringraphy, I. Ti de. 11. Series. 016,8,P74 901 C82.()94246-4
To M Y Parents for teaching me to seek understanding
and to Vida
for helping me to understand
what I find
Contents
ItdtnQ'WltdgmmLs
I
IX
3
JmroducUon
History as Inquiry in the Hellenic Age
23
III
History as a Literary Genre : T he Hellenistic Age
35
IV
T he Early Roman Empire: History as Story and the Rhetorical Use of History by the Early Christians.
61
V
The Distinction between Sacred and Profane History in Late Antiquity
89
11
VI
Conclusion : T he [)cvelopment of the Idea of and the Culluml Ferment of Late Amiquity
1tP/>t'1di.x: Bibliography of Wor.b fliskJry
it!
Oil
tht Arctptnl Vit'w
of tilt
l-li5lOl) "
12 1
Id,a of
147
Antiquity
Indnc tororum
15 J
/tukx I ndiCtlm
165
Indn of Namts aM Subj«u
175
Ackrwwledgments
J wish to express my gr.uilude to all those who. in various ways, have helped to make this book possible. In particular I would like to thank Jason L. Saunders and Paul Henry, SJ., whose leaching most directly led to and
guided this work, and Richard H. Papkin, Herbert Marcuse. and Stephen CrilCS. who have been inspirations both as teachers and as creative Ihinkers. I would also like to thank Sleven L. Goldman. Thomas St!'Cbohm. and W. Kendrick Pritcheu for reading earlier versions and providing much·needed encouragement, Paul P.soinos for invaluable help with the noles and indexes, Vida Pavesich for aid, counsel. and solace from lirSllO last (bUl nOI for typing the manuscript). and David Fate Nonon. over many years teacher,
editor, adviser. friend.
Abbreviations
:. .
I2nd
T ilE ~()T.:S,
classica l Creek a nd Latin au thors arc cited accord·
the standard abbreviations of the O'!!ord Classim{ J)icliona~,., cd . (Oxford : C larendo n Press, 1970) . O ccasionally I have adopted the abbrc\"iat ions of the Liddcll-Sl'Olt·: Jmu:s Gmt-English Lr:ricon (Oxford: C larcndon Press, 1966). or Le..... is and Sho rt 's Lalin Di(tiona~v (Oxford : Clarendon Press. 1966 ). Early C hri stian aut hors not ind uded in any of the fo regoing arc ci u:d according 10 Ihe a htm:viations in Du Cange's Glossarium ,\ltdiat (/ hifimat Lnlinilalis ( Paris, 1840- 50) . In some cases I have had IQ const ruct ahbrc\-iations o r I have chosen 10 c:oma ru cl onc more consistent wi th the others than are Du Ca nge's. for a tabulation and ex planation ofa!lthe ahbreviations, see the Index Lncnrulll (pp. 13 1--&1). Whe re\'er possible. lhurs are cited according tn standard !lulI1berinK S},SII: lI1 S, atrhuugh I havc u nifo rm l}" used Ara bic numerals rather than thc mixtures (If Arabic and Roman o((cn fou nd. C it a tions by pa~e (" p.") rt:fer to th e pagin ation of a pa rticu lar edition, us uall y sta ndard , listed in lhe index I.ocorum . A citatio n of th e form "1.345 , 1- 8" refers to Volum e I, page 345, li nes I~ . I n addition , t he fo llowing abb reviations arc used for seri es, journals, and collect ions: .4c rr Andtnt Chri.Jtiafl II'ritm: Tlu Horb ofthr Fathrr.J in TrnllStation. AiVF Thl .4ntl-Nianr Fathtr.J. Transla tions of the writings of the fathers down to ,\ . Il . 325. Et! . Alexander Robcn s a nd Jamcs Donald son. in~ 10
,U\-
(J
U(JJJirnl ./ollrlllll.
er
Clrmiail Phi/v").!:.!'.
CSf:I.
(;url!llJ l/"ripfuflllII f(drf;mlim/'lll/l fal;II/If!IIII ,
Oit'ls, DC
H crm:1Il1l Di t·h., /)oxo,e,mphi ,/!Talri. U('din : d(" G ru ylcr .
1879.
D- K'
Hc' rn131111
Dids. IJ il Fra,e,lIIrnl( d". ror.mkrari*rr. i th
("d . ,
rt'\'is('d h y Wahlu'r Km nz. 8('rlin: \\'r irlman n. 1954.3 \'ols.
GC'S
Oi, ,e, riuhiJf"htn rhTiJIIi(hrn SrhrijiJltlln (/" m/In } ah rhund"II . Bf'rlin : Akadl'mi(' dc'r \\,iss(' llsc halic'n . 1897- 1%9.
GRBS
(,',uk. Roman and
Il &Th
!!il la" .
lilAC
j "I"llIIrf, l iil ;\lItil,,- III/d (;"';,\/1'11/11111.
J IlI J IIS
J ournal q( /1"
J ournal q{ f M/flli,. .'ill/di,l .
NPNF
•<1
//Tiff
1~1'::'fIIllin' .\'Iudiu.
77"(111'. . 1Ii,' to~ )'
of IdfflS.
Srl", l.ihwTl' oj Ill., ,\'iant and Posl-Siant Falkm rif Ill., Christian Church. Ed . Philip Schaff. NI'\\' Ymk : The
Christian I.il('rillurr Co .. 1886-90 .
PG
.1 .•1'.
PI.
.I .- P. Mi.'tllt'.
~ ti.'t IH" . Pn 'mlo.~ il/'
Cl/mu Comp/fllls. S"i,s (;rtucn.
Pntrnlo~in'
Om',/.)' (;ompl,tu5. S"i,.f lA /inn.
THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE IDEA OF HISTORY
I N ANT I QU I TY
I Introduction
exhibits a striking preoccupation with history. The resecularization ofhislory writing in the four· teenth-century Florentinc chronicles and the Renaissance rediscovery of the value of knowing something about the human terrestrial past contributed to making history,' for the fiTSt time in Western civilization, an independent pan of the educational curricul um . Francis Bacon, for example, divides all human learning into history , poesy, and philosophy.' Since then histories have been writlen not only with the traditiona l subject matters of nations and wars (including the medieval variant, ecclesiastical history), but also with subject mallers both wider and narrower. Histories have been written of continen ts, civilizalions, and the world ; but they have also been wriuen of institutions, languages, and cultures. There are histories of the arts (liberal , fin e, mechanical, domestic, and martial ), of aesthetics, art criticism, and taste, as wd l M of the sdences and technology. Historks have a lso been written of images, themes, problems, and id eas that recur in the folklore , art, and intellectual culture that unite a civilization, of schools and movements of thought , and of enteTlainments, sports, and games. There are also histories of history writing, one part of an extensive literature of historiography . A variety of political and social theories have found in history the evidence both for analyses of prevailing systems and for predictions or prescri ptions about the future. Metaphysical analyses oflhe whole course of history have issued in a variety
M
ODERN WE$TERN TH QU<;; UT
I Sce But rice Re ynolds "Shifting C urren ts in Hiswrical Crilici5m," JHI 11 (1953): 171-92; Louis Green, " Hi5torical In terpl'"elat ion in the Fourteenth Century Florentine Chronicles,"' JHI2R ( 1967) : 16 1-78; and Donald J. Wilco.:. TII, Dtllflopmt"1 .f FlfIfflItiM Hllmtlllist Hisl~,iol rflplg ill lite Fiflu~tA CmlllTJ , Harvard Hisl0f"ical Studitll, 82 (1969). I Bacon. AallllllC""tllf of l~t,"li"" Bk. 2, Pt . I, para . \ .
of phi losophies o f history; illld his to ry has hccll ta ken to he the proof o f Chris tia nit y as wt' lI as its illl1l'(llIOSI ('sst'nCl', il s different'e from and sUJXriorily to all o th"r n' li)(ions. I1 is not a n t'Xaggeration 10 say th at the idea o f histo ry. is Ollt' ur tilt' most wid('1\". innut'lllial a nd for· ma tivt' idt'as in du' modt'm \\'(' S\(' rtl iult'llt'e tu al world . ' Til t' idea of hi story that has inf()rml'n th,' di slinel iwly modem social thco ri rs, philosophies, and th('uluJ.(i('s is that his tory is tdie. or goal-directed : then' is an ('lid or glial- a 1,los- lOwarn which his tory is (incvi tably ) mO\'in)(, whidl mOlY he kno wn ('itlll'r h ~' ration a l in q uiry in to the la ('ts ur hy renlatioll. and in rela tion tu which all prior actions and CVCntS ha\"(' hot h their nU'allin .~ ;mci tlH'i r \·alur. I n the past hund rcci years this icka has hfTIl t'X H'lIsiwly cliscussect , ilS orig in s sought in "ar l ~ .J ewis h Ill" Christian thuug h t, its , 'ariants dassiIi ("d , its cnnscqu(,IIC('s prais('d o r niti('i . . I'(t. a nd it has ht,t'n C"ompan'd with n tht'r and ('arli t'r id t'as ur history. In the SlIt:(""('l'(l ing " haplcrf> I shall lry III d t'\('rOlit ll' tlt(' d('\'c,lupnH'u t ('1' dJ(' id,'a fir history ill a llt;quity, taking as my horiwll this inllUl'11l ial a mi Illodl'rn ;d (,,;1 or history as goa l· dir('ct('d . Bill th is is (Jnly a " htll';zon" nc'(·ausf'. dcspiu' the weigh t o f p r('\'iolls disnlss;o n , t ill' ('v idt'lll"l' slmws Iha t tht' id('a of his to ry a s going sunwwlll'n' i", l1<1t li .u nd in llllli{llJiI Y. T hc'rt' is . as I haw just s tl!o:~t's H'd . a wic\t'ly ;IlT ('~h'd accoun t I o f thc id t a of history in antiquit y, ,llId it pr('suppusc's thitt there was a n o p posit iOlI h(' tWt'{'JI tlu' GI':t('c',,- Rt IOlal) a lld .Juda(·f)-C hristian c' ullures. Although this oppusi tiun \\
~ I "d " n'
Cum... p. ~ " I'
Hi M\lr~ , "
.1111 IU 1I!»9J ;:fj
" On ly in H .. I1f'nic :md WI'"lIi I.. rn ,·;,·il; l .lI inn flid hisl"ri"OI I thu II)!: h. ,\I·tIU;r.... Iruly funda m('ntal rot(' for Ihf' ... h"lr Ju unUl'(' of .·uhur ..... Simil;u ·ly . Kos l;u Papaioallll ou . "'nlt COIl~c nl,li'H I Hr H i5l"~ :' /)j~ltfM ' :! O !ItiI.Jl ::.t!I- :l5. ".Iul H tnr~' , SJ .. l ,IY' [St . • lug l/Slillt 0/1 P, .sQltlfli(l· j !'IitW Y" rk: "Jat'mil hm , I ~ijill ) , 11, :151 111:11 I ht idras o f Ht''' li"n . ptrlorHl lit ~. l. ncl h;NtHr y ,UI" limd .. m r nl l.t in nllld (, rll Wt Sttnl Ihlllll!;lll al1d t l1li rtly u nk nllwn ill IhrM' ti.rm N In 11", ;\llt'i"11\ ,..",Id . K a r l Rl'illllilrdl l" " h iln o.ophy ann H is· sa ~ $:
to ry amlOll,l1; Iht (;rttks." (;'NU and R MII. It . ~ . I I HI~I.I) : H1 _!IO I,md rnak ..s III r xplain w hy {irrt k IIIUII)(III . nn tik., lIl"d(' I'll , r:< lK'rir nrtd 1111 W" h l('1ll :,b"u! Ih r rrl ;lI il'ln~ h i p Ilt l \\ rt u ph ilfl!lOph y allll h iN t.... ~ . :\ nd t ))wah l S ..... IlJ.:II·r I Th, Dulllft '!IIIr, 11 ;'M , :! ,101. ( "tW Yo rk : Knnpr. 1!11m , I : 1:1:.11 d l"nits his turit':\1 l""Il S" iUII ~Ut~~ 11> t hr " Chusical
soul. ' Thr t"oll owi,,)!: di~(,1l5~ic ll1 "".hillil,; pllSSa!{h Ir"m \·:... i"u~ sd ll!lars ,md
thinktn il·
lus trati ve: of the: .-it\> Ihat i~ ... idd ~· :u'('t' pl m ,HId p;ort k ul:lr ,,"iuu in it. :\ mo rt rS ltuS;H list uf wurks Ih;1I fXl'Uulltl llr i""ukt Ihi~ ,'k w will hI' found ;n Ihl' ,\ppt'n ·
di x.
" Sf't . In. I'sa m plf', Ym k: Colunial " rl'ss.
HI'!{<'l, J ~ l(lO l,
1.NI~ w rill IIr, I'ltilo ,,,p~ r '!/ Ili" (I~ I". Ira m . J. Sihrf't j ;-';tW 1'1. :t, S.·.·. :1. C ha ll. 1, pp, :1I11- :W,
Introdutt;on
5
was Lucien Laberthonniere's I~ rialtime chrititn tl I'idialisme grtc;6 the theme of the book is that Greek philosophy is in ra.dical opposilion to C hristianity. But although they carefully preserved the Greek philosophy and its language and its dialectical procedures and even its thoories, they introduced here somethi ng else. h is a different spirit that flows in their speculations. Under their pen , words change meaning and concepts take on a different content. Far from bei ng allevialw, I should say rather that in their thought the opposition explodes: for, to be definite, it is not a conciliation that they are bringing about , it is a substitution; they substitute one doctrine for another doctrine and one attitude lor a nother altitude. And that remains true of all the great doctors of the Gred church a nd uf the Latin c! Irch ... . . . . This combination, rather than producing a stable equilibrium in which one might have hoped to settle down , finally came to the point of manifesting even more complelt:ly Ihe opposit ion that we point OUI . • . .
It is this opposition that we would like to try to make plain. 1
Note the claims here: th ere is a different "spirit," in accordance with which "words change meaning and concepts take on a different content "; it is "a substitution [of] . .. one doctrine for another, " a "radical opposi tion." And from this opposition fullows the basic move in the usual account of the idea of history in antiquity: the con tention that the Judaeo-C hristian idea of history differs radically from the Graet::o-Roman . This move was already made in 1891 by Wilhelm Windelband . the historian of philosophy. He writes : The fundamental tendency ofChriSlian thought .. , was to portray thc historical drama of fall and redemption as a connected series of events taking plact': once for all , which begins with a free decision of lower spirits to sin, and has its turning point in the redemptive revelation, the resolve of divine freedom . In contrast with the naturalistic concepts of Greek thought, hiJtory is (onuilJtd of QJ tJr~ rtalm offill ac/s DJ • l.a ~rthormitr~ , 1.1 rifl/ism( duili", t l l"ldifl/iS1M ITn (Paris, 1904; reprinted Paris: Edilion de Scuil, 1966), I Ibid .. pp. 245-46. j. Guiuon [u Tr>fl/n " r i,""il; rhn PI«i" rl SI. Auplttrw (Paris: KQvin, 1933). p. 357 1 cites LaberthOf1R~~ in i.ll~ <:OUrK of arguing ror the ~. placem~nl of cycles by a hillo riul world "with spiritual sigoificancc,"
Uta of HjJto~I'
6 personaii/ia, taking
ably
10
JI{Q(( bllt OMt.
and [he'
c hara c u~ r
of tht'st'
aCI!I,
agret'·
the entire consciousnt"ss of lim (' . is of f'ssf'ntia lly rdigiou5 sig-
n ificanCf'.R
A. O. Lovcjoy, later the founder of Ihe stud y of the history of ideas, made similar observations about C hrist ianity and the idea of history just after the turn of the ce ntury .~ Discussion of the rn 3t1N im.: reased arou nd t he middlt of Ihe ('cntury. and onc of the mos t infl uen ti al parti cipants in that discussion was Osca r Cull mann, Ih(' theologia n and opponent of Albert Scll'.,;ei tzer a nd Rudolf Bult mann . In ChristuJ /lnd dit ail Cullmann argues tha t history is the very essence of Christianity , Ihat " all C hristian t heology in its innN mosl cssen('(' is Diblica l hislory,"IO that is, rcvdatory or redemptive history. For him "the unique C hristian conception of li n.t· as Ih e scene I)f redcmpli\"(' histol')' is of a two-fold chara('lcr .. . . I n tll(' first plan'. salvation is bound to a continuous timt proctJs which t'mbraccs past . present and fu ture.. .. And in the second plac(' . all parts of this line a rc related to onc historical foCI at tht~ mid-point."" And this. it is Iwlie\'cd, is radica lly different from Greek a nd Ruman \·it'ws. Craeeo-Roman thought IOcus('d on thi' s tuet y of the nat ural world in which what is real is what is repeatabl(": not th(' individual but th(' species is of interest . The Gracco- Roman mind was devoted to realities and truths outsid e tim(, (Ior rxamplr . Parmcnidcs. Plato. and Plotin us), to a bstractions and ideas . rat h(,r than individ uals. " It is abstraction tha t is for them tht" instrument of tru th and the instru ment of salvation.. .. (the ind ividual I is for them the scanda l of thoughl."'2 The natural world is ('tc rnal and Ihe natural species are Winddband , HiJIQV Qj PlrilQJQfJII.J. Irans. J am" H. Tuns t Sr......... ork: Macmillan. 1 89~ ), p. 257. t Lo~jo}' . ~ Rf:l igion and Iht T imt Proctss," .4IrItri(.. ~ ) 011111 ..1 0./ 1'lttO/oJ.)· 6 (1903) :488(('.; "Thf: Enlangling Alliallft of Rtl igion and Hino,)'," Ilihhnljtl/ll1lQI 6 ( 1907) :261fT. On his view. howewr. this constilUlt$ a na",' in Christian tt h if~ . whidl oughl 10 bt- rf: moved . 11 Cullmann, C"rnllll MII4 tiit Lif (Zurich, 1946) - CA,il f rl It Ttfll/u tNtuch!td, 1947) ... ClrriSI IIfIII Ti"". 17It Pri""li.·~ ClrriJljlllf COllaplIolI rif Ti"" .. ...I HidO~I·. IU. nl. Floyd Fibon (Philaddphia: \\'f:slm inistrr Press. 1 9~) . p. 23. Similarl)". C. ~ . Cochrane, CllriJIi4~ il.J 1I1f4 CIIIJsifO/ CIt/llt" (Nt"'· York: Ox(ord l ' nh'rnil y Prtss. 1(44 ). p. 225. tI Chrisl tlffd Tim" p. 32. cr. Gtrharl Ladlll"r, "T ht Impacl o( C hristianil)·... in TIlt T,lIl1Jfo,.,. .. ,illfl rif tiu Ro",..1t WllrI'. td . l.y"n Whilt (lkrkdty: Uni\"ruily'oI'Cali(ornia p~ss . 1966). C hap. 2. 11 1.abf:rttH:mni~rf:. Lt ,illtismt chrilulI, pp. 248-50. I
Introduction
7
eternal by virtue of the repeated life cycles of the individual members. Thus, on the usual view, time, which is the number or measure of change in nature, is understood as a circle (for example, Arist. PIt.Y$. 229h). Rectilinear motion is "imperfect and perishable," circular is " perfect and eternaL" " Like all natura) species the human being is also eternal ; and just as each individual und ergoes the developmental cycle of the species, so events in the human social and p0litical world were believed to recur in cycles (for example, the Stoic theory of the cyclic des truction and recrea tion of the world ). " For the Creeb, what has been is what shall be, what is done is what shall be done again ."14 The id ea of history is logically dependent upon the tdea of time; it too, therefore , is circular. "The ancients . .. were impressed by the visible order and beauty of the cos mos, and the cosmic law of growth and decay was also a pattern for their understanding of history. According to the Greek view of life and the world , everything moves in recurrence, like the eternal recurrence of sunrise and sunset , of summer and winter, of generation and corruption. " I ~ History, then , is taken to be circular and repetitive. Therefore, neither history as a whole nor any individual historical event can have any pa nicular meaning or value; si nce if a thing or an event comes [ 0 pass over and over again in just the same way, then no one instance of the type can have any more or less meaning than any other. None of them has any meaning in itself; only the type or form of the thing, which is eternal. " When a man lives with the certain ty of the finalit y and excellence of the world , he feels no need whatsoever to confer upon the passing and fortuitous event a privileged status destined to fortify his faith in his own a utonomy or to calm his fears over his capacity 10 form his life according to the desires of his own will ." 16 Since history and historical even ts in Graeeo-Roman thought were meaningless, there eou ld be for them no philosophy of history. "To the G reeks a philo$ophy of history would have been a contradiction in Kostas Papaioa nnou, "Nature a nd History in the G n:dll. Conception of Ihe Cosmos," DiftlntfJ, no. 25 (1959), p. 9. Likewise Robert E. Cushman, ~Greek and C hris· tian Views of Time," j(JllrJullllj Rdilio" 33 (1953): 256. It Papaioannou , ''Cosmos,'' p. 26. L) Kart U)with , M tflning in Jlillory (Chicago: University of Chicago Prts.$,1957), p .4. " Wilhdm Dilthey, Einltihl"l in dj, {;';JJt JwiJUIIMlt4jkn , lrans. L. Sauzin (t'aris: PrnKs uni versilaires, 1942), p. 25. 11
8
Uta
of History
u:rm5,"1I Lowith wrote. And Kostas Papaioannou sa id , "A philosophy of this kind, with the rigid oppositions which it impl ies between NalUre and mind , between objectivit y and su hjecti vity, hctween necessity and freedom , as well as the value emphasis which it places on all the generative facuhies of hislOry runs counter to the deepes t aspirations of the Greek mind ." '1 Moreover. on the usua l account , this repclitious, meaningless circulari!)' of limt' a nd history " must be ex perienced as a n enslavement , as a curse .... (,yc rything keeps recurring . ... that is why the philosophical thinking of the Greek world laOOn with the problem of lime and also wh)· a ll G reek s tri ving for redemption seeks as its goal to oc freed from this eternal , circular coursc and thus to bt' freed fmm tim e itself. "I" The pessimi sm, " the eternal desperate pessimism of the eterna l circle of events,"70 generaled by this explai ns, fin ally. both the " failure" of classical cuhure to satisfy the spiritual needs of human beings and the consequent decline of the anciem world .tl Graeco- Roman thought, characterized ill this way, is then contrasted with Judaeo-Christian thought. Tht' laller, it is said , has a fundam entally different conception of time, and thus brings into existence a fundamentally new idea of history. J ewish and C hristia n thought begins from the createdness of the world. of the natural species , and of human beings. For it tim e, and therefort' history, has a beginning and an end-Crea tion and Day of Judgment- although J ews and C hristians differ over the rela tionship between the present age in history a nd the decisive even I in history. As against the cycl ic views of classical antiquity, they "saw timt' as the li near process of the purpose of God . Initiated by a divine act of creation , it moved towards a definit e "tt).os: or cnd , whi ch would mark the achievement of the divine purpose ."l? Time and history art' here understood to be " U.with, Aftfllli", ilf Hu/(}ry, p. 4. 11 Pilpaioannou. "Cosmos, p. 3. "Cul!milnn. CArisl G~d Time, p. ,')3 . ~ R. L. P. Milburn, EArly CAristitJ~ J"tnfJ r,'fll;o1tS .f HisllJ~l (London; A . and C. Black, 1954), p. 7. " E.g., An ton-Hermann C hrousi. uThr Relation of Religion 10 Hi$lory in Early Chriltian Thought," "T'M "TMmiJf 18 ( 1955) :67; John Baillie, TM Bdiif ill Pro,rus (New York : Scribnen. 1950), p. 50; and Jamrs M. Conno1ly. 1/II."'fI" mm.., GM /JeI Wc",1 tif QxI (No::w York: Macmillan , t963-64), p. 4. FM an nrlier " o::rsion of tho:: "fa ilure and ded ine" mood. set' J aoob Burckhanh , TIu ..ttt tif C01\.f tll~tillt (1852), nilns. Moses Hildas (New York: Random HOl.lse, 19+9), Chaps. 5 and 6. ft S. G . •'. Brandon, " R.C. and A.D.: The C hristian Philosophy of His tory," His/ory TINiIlY 15 (1965) : 197 . Uktwiso::. C ullmann, Christ IIIIt! Timt. pp. 52«. N. H. Snailh H
Inlrodu.ction
9
rectilinear, once and for all, and directed toward the end or goal of the Messianic Age. In contrast with Graeco-Roman theories of " purposeless cycles, history was now seen 10 be linea r, progressing in a straight line from th e six days of creation to a single day of Judgment. "n Thus, " to Ihe Jews and Christians .. . history was primarily a history of salvation.":M There is but one history, that of the Divine Economy: " the Biblical conception of the unfolding of God's plan for the creation, and particu larly for man's red emption in history . "~ As unders tood in Judaeo-Christian thought , " terrestrial history is a forward-moving process of a very special kind. It has an txortw, a centn"", and afinis, a definite beginning, a middle or focal point, and a definite end ."" Each event is thus unique, playing its unique role in the economy, and therelore meaningful. This new conception of history, so it is thought, can be seen in the development of Christian historiography. On the one hand, the new importance attached to history is seen in the invention of altogether new forms of historical composition, ecclesiastical history and the biography of saints. But more significantly, in the confiden ce of the early church historians-Eusebius, Socrates Scholasticus, Sozomen, and Evagrius-it is seen tha t Divine Providence guides all events: "The Church his torians' task had a basic unity, for all the historians and their readers would agree that church history was properly and essentially a record of the power of God and of the action of God in human affairs. Thus church history was a test of the truth of the faith .. .. Hence the church historian had a special vocation within the church, not only as a narrator of events, but as a channel through which the truth of the faith was proclaimed."7/ It is widely agreed , then, that for Judaeo-Christianity, historythat is, the eschatological history of salvation-is linear, once and for all, and therefore meaningful in the goal-directed sense of fulfilling ["T ime in the Old Tellament," in PToflliu otl F_ljillmnt.l, W. F. F. Brutt (Edinburgh: T. &. T . Clart, 1963), pp. 1 7~1 distinfl:uishe$ among circular, horizont"l, "nd vertical time. D Constantinos A. Palridcs, T!u PIt_ix.vul tM Lu/in (lkrkdey: University ole ... lifOrnia Press, 196.5), p. 6. h LOwith, MtaJIi"'l ill H iJlory, p. 5. n R. A. Markus, " Pleroma and Fullillment. The Significance or H istory in St. I~_ nacus' Opposition to Gnosticism," Vi,UUu CltrutUvuu 8 (1954):2 13. ,. Baillie, Bflitj ill Pr9,RJJ, p. 84. Likewise C ushman, "Vicws of Time," p. 254. "Glanville Downey, "The Perspective: or the £.arly Church Historians," GRBS 6 ( 1965) :69.
10
Idta oj History
Goo 's promise ofsalv3lion for his people, whereas for Grac:co-Roman culture history is circular, repetitive, and therefore meaningless . Since philosophy of hislOry is inconceivable apart from history under· stood as meaningful , it is fair 10 say Ihal this fund amentall y new philosophic pursuit is a consequence of Judaeo·Christianity. " The very existence of a philosophy of history and its q ues t for a meaning is due 10 the history of sa lvation; it emerged from faith in an ultimate purpose: .... History . .. is meaningful only by indicating some transcendent purpose beyond the actual facts," wrote l..ow ith .lII And it is in this sense thal Augustine 's /)t rivitalt Dei is often sa id to be the firsl treatise on the philosophy of hislOry. " The Christian philosophy of hi story was fi rst enuncia ted by Augustine in response to pagan claims that this new religion was responsible for the sack of Rome by Alaric's Got hs in 410."29 Again , " Augustine may righ tly be called the father of the C hristian ' philosophy' of history. His major work on the subject, De dIJitall Dti {o nlra pa,(QI'IOS ... was written in the apologetic and polemic vein typical of mos t of his writings . "~ The widely a ccepted view of the id ea of history in antiquity that 1 have been outlining is, as is clear, a part of a more general discussion of the relationship between C racco-- Roma n and J udaco-Ch ristian innuences on the formation of Wes tern thought a nd civilization . It is a commonplace that Western thought is Ch rist ian (or JudacoC hristian).'l Bu t although it is !l;cnerally and vaguely agreed that Tht vi~ that J udaro-Chri.... ianil y is responsiblt ror the inven tion of philo5oph)· or his lory is aometi~s u rritd to the e)ltrem" or su pposing Iha t only a Chrislian can Il:a ll ~· undemand hislOr)" al all. J. N. loiAgis, ror vcample. wriU:I: ~Tht hiSlorical ttmpcraTTlCCnl. or ..... hat,.v,. r you n il il, 10 be ge nui ne must be deeply impregnated with the Christian Slory- IC1triJti~lfil.f ~lId HiJlo~, ( London: Finch, 190~ ), p. \'iiil . And A. N. Wildtr IE,,~~ C1trilli~1I RlttltPir (London: S.C .M ., 1964), p. 136J gua evt n further and daim~ Wnn prnpl,.~ ha \· ~ a history in tht true .eMe (Keep' Israel and thos,. thal ha\"(· tnltrrd into in undtrstandinR or man. The re.ality.sc nle or other human KrouP! is prehistorical and prtpcrsonal br comparison." Emile Brchitr ," Quelqu,.s traits dt I ~ pll ilosophi,. dt \'hiS\oir,. dans I'anliqu ilf clauiq\I(," R . " IIiJl8i" tI Philostl/lftit Rtl(citttm ( 1943). (>. 38-401, hnw,.,·rr. holds that Ih( StOlet af1d Polybiu" w;lh their not ion o(, h,. Un il}· ofmankind. rrtalrd philosophy of his lory; Christianit y did nOI. Jt Brandon, ~ BC . and A.n .. ~ p. 191. J ean Dllniclou I"SI. I ren~ rl It. origines drla theologie de I'histoirt," R. dt J( imu " U,iMt 34 (1947) : 227-3 1J finds tht origin in Irenaeus' C"lIplana ti on oftht relation !xtwttn Irn- O ld a nd Ne .... TeslamentS in Irrms of a progressive ~ucation of hum ani t ~·. ,. Patrides, P1tot~ i.t, p. 13. " Sce, ror tJ:llmple, Lynn White. ·'Christian Myt h and C hrist ian History:' j H/ 2 ( 1 942) : \4~; Frank li n La Van Baumer, cd., M aill Cumllls ~J U'rsUnI 11HJulltI (New York: Alfred. A. Knopf, 196 11. p. 20: :lOO B~JK II"rilill;(J ~ Sdilll AUl UJli",. cd. l>I'ilh 111 Uiwilh, M,tmi", /" lIiJI01.J,
p . ~.
Introduction
II
Christianity did decisively transform Western thought, accounts of the rise of Ch ristianity as a distinctly intel lectual phenomenon usually set forth the differences between "pagan" and Christian Western civilization rather than showing (in detail) how the transformation came about. Very onen studies of the relationship between the Graeco-Roman and Judaeo-Christian intellectual worlds interPl"f:t the period of their confluence in terms either of the "decline" of the ancient world or else of the Christian heritage from "pagan" thought, the "classical heritage of the Middle Ages. ":12 In the perspective of historiography generally, this tradition has the effect of depriving late antiquity- the period in which the fusio n took place--of a character of its own. It is seen either as the end of what came before or as the beginning of what came later; in terms either of what went in or of what came out, but not in its own terms. In the narrower perspective orthe historiography of ideas there is the parallel tradition of opposing the Graeco-Roman and JudaeoChristian thought-worlds. This tradition, as the historiographical framework , brings to light another problem with the usual account of the idea of hi story in antiquity: it is static, nondevelopmental. TIle different "ideas" of hisintroduction by WhitMy J . Oales (New York: Random HouK, 1948), p. v. ~ It has been customary to give ahurt dlrift to the period in studies of cultural history because it i. "wholly religious," ~ superstitious, " or "decadent." Typical i. A. H. M. Jones {TM DttliM 11/./" A",i,,1f World (New Hork: HolI, Rinehart, and Win· ston, 1966), 2 :9S7- 70l , who characterizes the age generally as "religious" and aSluts that its only great intellectual achievement was the elaboration of .yuemalic Iheologies. Studies or the "decline": t' erdinand Lot, 171, EM of lie, A/\riml W"IJ aM tIu 8,g;II' 1I;lIgs .f lit, Middll A"s (New York: Alrred A. Knopr, 193 1), Charles Corbiire, Lt Cllristiollislne ,1 la fill " III plt;/osqpltit alll;qw (Paris: Fischbacher, 1921 ); OUo Seuk, (HJellkllt, des UJlurga"lS tilT A"litm Wtll, 2 11015. (Berlin: Siemenrolh and Troschel, 1901); R. A. Lafferty, 171t Folf ofRo." (New York: Doubleday, 197 1), a literary trUI· ment or the facll; Solomon Katz, TIu lHtliM of R.ortu oNi lItt Riu ~ Mtdimd E",O/Jt (hhaca: Comell Univenity Pren, 1955); f . W. \falbank, Dtdilll of Ill, ROIJIiI" Ertl/Ji" i. T1u WtSt (London: Cobbeu Pren, 1946); K. Pfister, D" UJlltrl'''l dIT AlIlikm Wt{1 (Berlin , 1MJ); Roger Remondon, lA mu d, I'E>nfJi,., ",,,,,ilt (Paris: Presses Uni· versitaire., 1964). The notion of a "dedine" is rejecled altogether by Richard Mans_ fidd , 17tt MyIlt of Ro".,'s Flllf (New York: Thomas Y. Crowd/, 1958) . Studies or the ~heritage or the Middle Ages": W. G . de Burgh, TM UIQCY ~ lItt A.oml WQ1hi, 2nd ro. (New York: Bames and Noble, 1960); H . SI . L. B. Moss, nu Bi,tII of tJu Mitltih A"S, 395-1JU (London: Oxford Unillel1llity Press, 1947); Stewart Perowne, T1u F-Ad of tAt RomlUl Wo,1d (New York: Thomu V. Crowell, 1966); R. R. Balgar, T1u CI(jStiaJl Htri/4Je (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1954) ; Chris_ topher Dawson, T1u Md:;,., of EllrtlPl (London: Sheed .t Ward, 1932); Henry Osbom Taylor, T1u CllUsic4l HniJo.g, ~14t MitUh Azt.l, 4th ed. (New York: Ungar, 1957) .
nt
12
Idea of HiIlor.!
tory ar~ presented as deductions, respectively, from a metaphysical and a theological systl!m understood as complete and unchanging . There is the metaph ysical though t of the Greeks; and there is the theology of thc: Christians. Each has il5 own slarling points, and each comes to its own conclusions. h is commonly agreed that Ihe Christian doclrinc of the Word made: Fh:sh gives 10 history a significance it did nOI alrt:ady pos~ess for chlssieal Greek thought. Timt' cea~s 10 be- circular and acquires din:ctionality. Directional;!)" is constituted not only by Mos but by finis . Time has beginning with Creation, recd ves its Itlos through the Incarnation , and has itsfillis with tht Last Jud,!:mcont. Time- thus acquirrs meaning as the interval bclw«n crC'alion and redemption .... I n sueh a perspttlive hiMOry hr.comr:s Ilti/Jgmhirl!t" or ~aving hislOry. BIll Ihili ~rs~etive would be quilr impossiblfo ror thl' Grl!'l!'k mind in so ra r as it d id not attain to thl' concrpt io n of tl'lrololilical or hislOri cal l;mr. JJ
Just as the two thought-worlds arc taken to bf' complete and unchanging, so their ideas art' taken \0 be complete and unchanging, the resuh of no process of development, independt'nI from and opposed to one another. M The transformation of the idea of history, Cushman, "ViewJ of 7i'1PH'," p. 2.l
ule 10 Iht' diK'US.!ion on t;hangl: and t;Qnlinuil y. and. mort' specifkal1r, 10 Ihe problcm oI'whal ma >' be understood by conversion rrom paganism 10 Christianit), in latl: antiquil(' (p. 131 ). 11
RQmtllf
Introduction
13
which I hope to make clear in this study, was on this view not a transformation at all, but only a substitution or supersession of one idea by a wholly different, alien, and oppposed one bearing the same name. For a transformation requires a self-same entity, which undergoes the transformation . Insofar as those who hold this orthodox view profess to be accounting for the interaction of Gracco-Roman and Judaeo-Christian thought, of course they affirm continuity and genuine transformationj but fundamentally, they believe that Christianity brought something entirely new into the cultural world . W. G. de Burgh, for example, states that Christianity "revolutionized the entire fabric of Mediterranean civilization";U but his footnote 10 that statement says: "This assertion is perfet:t1y compatible with the recognition of the historic continuity between Christianity and pre-Christian Jewish and Hellenic thought. A fair mind can hardly fail to be impressed by the disparity between the Christian faith ... and any other creed known to history. Affinities in points of detail would not be so arresting, were not the differences ofspiril and influence so profound ." While it is certainly true that Graeco-Roman and Judaeo-Christian ways of thinking are very different, it is no It.:ss true that the one passed into the other, and not all at once ("with Ihe conversion of Constantine"), but gradually and over a long period of time. So it was that Christianity had such evident social effects on the institutions of tht.: Roman Empire long before it became the official religion that Gibbon could attribute partially to its influence the decline of the empirt.:. So it was, too, that the cultural ferment occasioned by the presence of a large and affluent Jewish community in Alexandria , the cultural center of tht.: Hellenistic world , produced the first attempted philosophical fusions of the Judaeo-Christian and GraecoRoman cultures in the writings of Philo and the first Gret.:k version of the Pentateuch, the Septuagint. so called after the alleged number of the translators. The acCt.:pted account of the idea of history, then, is nondevelopmental. It is an account of substitution or supersession. not of transformation, and it is rooted in an equally nondevelopmental view of the relationship between Graeco-Roman and Judaeo-Chriscian thought as the sources of our own intellectual tradition. But to understand our own tradition we shall have to seek a developmental and " De Burgh. Ut«}. p. 280.
/dtD DJ HiJIO~'
14
historical account of the ideas or modes of thought that we consider distinctively Christian or Judaeo-Chrislian. \Ve shall have to exa ~ mine changes in ideas within the context of political, social. religious, and intellectual or cultural movements, '" From the cultural historian's point of view, the rise of C hristianity must he not a miracle or a divine intervention the d ecisi,'ent'ss of which is sttlled from th e beginning. Christianity is one among man y historical processes. And just as il influences (eventuall y) Ihf' ways ill ..... hich Wesu:rn peopk think and fe el and act, so 100 it is influenct'd hy the cuhural form s and movements of the world into which it was born, s uch as , n OI only G reek philosophy, but also Crt'ck and Roman rhClOric. politics, and education. And just as Christianity inOuencf's culture in the ea rly centuries of our era. so do Olh('r cultural movements, s uch as those of religious innovation , Rather than looking at t he rise of JudaeoChristianity as the replacemcnl of ont' {'ultural world by another, we need to understand the processes hy which the changes occurred , And to the extent that we fail to understand them . we shall also fail to understand ourselves ; for our intelkctua l tradition over Ihe man y centuries has been, in large pan, dr lt'rmined hy j ust such transformations, and we a rt' crea lurts of our own lradition . The accepted view of the idea of hi slory in antiquity is raulted in the firs t place ror being nondt'velopmenlal. hUI there is a deeper problem : Ihe whole literature uses an idt'a of histo ry that is defined beforehand-namely, hislory as Iht, wholl' temporal process of the wo rld (or, al leasl. or Ih(' human world ). o r, mort' simply. Ih(' pas t. I; • As early as 1904 t·, J. Di'iIRtr loond it IIn~at i s ra('t o~' 10 study Ihf' ~ ;ul ~' (;h riSliill1 wrilingl with a view solely \0 the history of d~ma . What illtf'rf'Uf'O him, instf'ao , was Mlhe process by wh ich the classical ci\·ilitalion. as it rlli ~ t ~ in th f' first th r ~ ('f' nt llries, wu uansformrd intO the Chri Jt iilni~ ('lIlturf' of the four ('(' II IU";f'1 Ix-gi n n in~ with Consla nlinf'~ [ E. A. Judge, '''Antikt und C h "; s t~nl llm : Somr Rf'cf'nt Work from Colognt," P",linetia (Auckla nd ) ~ (19731: 11. His n ....1I sllldil"S lOf'r~ puhlishf'd in his personal journal , Allti.l:t 11'''/ ChriJiI'IIIIIIII : his prf'1lrflm has Ix-tn nrried 0111 in tlx- R,aflu iJ:.(ItI for A ~Ii.tt u,,1i CI!risltnllllll ano the jah,bu.d, fo r .h likt IlnJ C,'hrillmllllft. 8111 Ihue p ublications have llC't n widf'I r rn·if'wf'd. anothr I>~'rra ll f'nlf'rpri~ oflO'hit'h they a re a pari has, as a 'ellll!, had lilllt illnlltn('e on the fashions i ll scholarly work on la te ant iq uit y, For a comprthrnsh'f' ni lin l s lud~' of' OiiI,ICer and tht current Ilill., of Ihe enterprise, sce Eelwin A. J ud,R;f', M'Antikf' und Chris tt nl llm-: T owards i1 l>dini'ion of th.. Field. A 8 ilJlillgmphk..1 SI1 I'\"'~',w ;11 .iuJ.vl"f, I/Iul XII'f/l'lI(f" "R tI~, " j m,,,h,H 11', 1/. H. Temporini and W. f-laaJC {Berlin : Dt- (;nll'tc'" I!';\' ). Pt. :? \ ',,1. :?:I: I. (If'. t - :.i\. " That Cu llmann, at leaM , mtans Jomf't hinll dilff'ff'nt h~' ~ hi s lUry" -n a md r . th~ put- than does Augustinf' is rt<'Ognizffi or R..'\ . ~brku$. SalOl/lflll : Hifllt~I, 1t1ld SKit ! I' i1l /ht 71tn/ItV of SI . ..f.Uf"J /illl' CCamorid.R:r: C;lnlhrid.1(1" ( ' nil'f'rsit~ rrf'.~s, 1 ~70 ). pp. 23 1- 32.
no,
Introduction
15
And then it proceeds within this context to examine "pagan" and Christian ideas of history . But since the content is assumed to be the same for the two ideas, it is more accurate to call these "patterns" or "views" than "ideas" of history. They oppose "linear" or " progres· sive" to "circular" or "cycl ic" patterns of history; but it is not doubted that the "history" of which these are alternative palterns is the whole temporal process. They oppose, in other words , different patterns or views of the same thing. Such a procedure is little likely to reveal what the ancients themselves thought history was if they happened to think that it was something other than the whole tempo-ral process. Rather than adequate studies of the development of the idea of history, this extensive literature is to be read as an account of ancient atlitudes toward the past. The definition problem can also, and more productively, be seen in terms of the question that is asked. The question about the idea of history raised in previous studies has been: What thoughts (opinions, views, atlitudes, visions, theories) have other or earlier cultures had about that for which the idea is history? The attempt has been, in the philosophical and theological discussions, to understand different ideas of history by moving from things to ideas, to get at the idea by starting from the reality of which it is the idea . The procedure in general has been to attempt to understand previous ideas of a reality by comparing what was thought and said about that reality, assumed to be the stable, permanent object, referent, or content of the idea in question. And the result here is that, far from understanding any idea of what history is that is really diffirtllt from history understood as the whole temporal process, we can only come to see what other cuhures thought about our idea of what history is. It may be interesting to undel"Stand what other cultures thought about the past or the whole temporal process, but it is not to the point. If we want to understand better the impact of JudaeoChristianity on Western civilization it would be necessary to reexamine the cultural sources oflater Western tradition; and this is possible only to the extent that we are able to stand outside the framework of assumptions of Judaeo-Christian Western civi lization. In particular, it will be possible to grasp the impact ofJudaeo-Christian thought on the idea of history only if we first grasp what hi.story was thought to be before this impact occurred. It should be observed that the fashion of considering Graeco--Roman culture over against Judae
16
/dtD
of History
selves toward the " pagan " culture. Consider Tertullian's famou s rhetorical question , "What has Athens 10 do with Jerusalem?" In large part the aucmpts of modern scholars and thinkt rs to understand the relationship between these two cultures is still dominated by this e'd.riy Chmtian habit- Io r them. doubtless. a social necess il~' ! of defining themselves as over i:lgilillSl Hellenism . The interest of a philosopher and hi storian, however, shou ld be IQ und erstand the intdlectual shift s of late a ntiquity . And fo r this it is necessa ry to sec what the ancients thought history was rather than . in eni=ct, what they thought about what history is by a definition worked out only by a later tradition. I know of no dearer statement of Ihe probl em a nd its correct solution than Werne r Jaegc r's, speaking of th e history of paideia: Some critics have laid down that a historian of paideia must begin by giving his own definition of it . That is rather as if Ihe)' c,.;pccted a historian of philosophy 10 start either from Plato's definition of philos· ophy, or from [pieuru!', or from Kant's or Hurne's- all four being widely different. A hislory of paideia should desr.ribe as accurately as possible all the different meanings of Greek paideia. the various forms whieh it look, and the various spirilual levels al which il apprared , and should explain both their individual ~culiaritie5 and their hi510r· ical conne.ions.We need , therefore, 10 change the questio n asked : no t "What ideas have people had about (the one stabl e refe rent of the term) ' hislOry'?" but rather, "What different rderents has the I('rm ' history' had for these diffe rent ages and cultures?" This question is more satisfactory; for it does no t pres uppose a lack of development in the content of ideas but , rather, begins from Ihe quite real , if too little appreciated, permanence of the te rms making up the- intellectual \ ' 0cabulary of the Western tradition. As Kurt \'on Fril l pointed OUt nearly forty years ago," the histOry of Greek intellectual terms is of Jaqu, PlI.idtia, Irans. Gilb!:rl Hig ht t 3 \'015. (New York: O,.;Wn:l l lnivtni t)" 1 939-4~), 3: 300, n. 3 (to Bk . 4, C hap. 2 ). His t.iJrl.! CIt'il'iQ ~ iry ""d Gr«! Paitifill. (Cambridge Harva rd Unive rsity Pr~H , 196 1) oUllinn " tht transrorma tion of the tri.dition ofCr«k paidcia in the Christian ccnluti'l of la It an tiquityH (Prc[) . .. Von Frill. "NOOI and NQ£lN ill tht H"mt rK P'll"ms," c;r :It! , ]94:1):79. 8 nmu SIlt"II Spt'"...:he 1fl}m~r~ ~b Au","Iruck lCin~r ~lan kcn..,.t1t ," X"" l,,/rr/tildorr fu r Allliu rnuJ DnltscN Bildlllll 2 (1939) : 393-410) had alreadr derended analrsi) or the languagt as a sour« ror und~TSllnding tht thought-world oC antiquit)·. Tht view perhaps has its source in Hegtl: " Die i\u sg~d~hnlt ronsequenlt Grammalilt iSI d as Werk des I>enk~ns, tla, leinr Kategoritn darin Ix'mtrkl ith machl," EiII/rit""" i. dir JI
Press,
rOit
Introduction
17
interest because these terms still comprise the heart of our intellectual vocabulary and because therefore a knowledge of their development will clarify persistent problems by disclosing where, when, and in what context the terms acquired such significations as made for confusions about them or as a result of their employment. A word has , ordinari ly, many significations- some very diversebut there is reason to suppose that an examination of the attested uses of a word at a given time and place may be discriminated into a relatively few kinds from which may be determined a basic meaning or underlying idea. This should provide a starting point, a backdrop, against which the acquisition of new areas of signification or the loss or decline of older ones will appear either as further developments of older (original) facets of the idea or as the introduction of new ones. An exami nation of the uses of the ancient Greek words lmoQEiv, lO'tOQ£a, lO'toQu(6s:. and their an~stor, ImwQ. and the ancient Latin words /ristoria and Iristoricus will reveal what the term " history " in its various linguistic forms was taken to mean . This, properly speaking, is what " history" was thought to be in antiquity, and this, therefore, should be the primary focus for explicating the idea of history in antiquity. Secondarily, an examination of such semantically related terms as 'to 1tQO'YeyOva'ta and res gestae and of political, religious, and philosophical attitudes toward the past , would provide a more complete picture of the ancient idea of history, and, in particular, would enable us to see what, if anything, the ancients thought about the especially modern use of "history" as the whole temporal process . But these latter questions do not and need not form a part of the present study , because the weight of previous work , as I have argued, is, in fa ct, about ideas and attitudes toward the past; and while to somt extent it examines uses of the Gretk and Latin words based on tUtu){), it considers {UtoQia and /riston'a to mean the same thing as 'tCt nQOye· ytSvata or res gesitU-which, of course, by a modern dtfinition they do . I have been arguing that a study of the development of the idea of history in antiquity must , in the first place, take a cultural-historical J!nl,s."ll~ ilbtr dj, Plli/osophi, tilT ,ucllulrlt, 5amuu!u W,rt, (Su,IlIgart: Fromman, 1928), I : l OO. At leau one stutknt of von Frill, Marlin Ouwald, hall [Nbtw-; IIM IN Bt,illrUII,J 6f lAt A.thtnj~ DnnOCTOCY (Ox.ford: Cb.reooun Pr"" t 969)] employed this method in Oil book-length anal ysis of the terms N~ and EkOJA6o;;, which allempll to explain and :lUes, the signiflcance of the replacement of the latter by the (ormtT as the ordi· nary word for "Statule" at j ust about the time ofCle15thenes' reforms in the Athenian democracy.
18
Idea of HiJto ~.,
standpoint, and must, in the second place, proceed frum the meanings of the term "history." The~ have bten a few philological studies oflhi!! term in the past century. and it will bt well to review them . By the fifth and fourth centuries, (atOPlU, with a lengthy period of d ev\":lopment alrudy bthind it , was onc of a variety of words in use for designating knowledge or th e acquisition afknowledge. This constellation of Greek words- oo
I I.tul."
Introduction
19
following him, deal with antiquity in a few pages and devote most of their attention to the diffusion and diversification of cognate words in the Romance languages during and after the Middle Ages. And both of them focus on lmop£a and hutDriO while paying little attention to the related verbs and adjectives that would further illuminate its meaning and thus contribute to understanding the basic idea involved in its use. A thorough understanding of the meanings of these words and the changes that occurred in them requires that attention not be restricted to one realm of discourse--history as a kind of knowledge or in connection with history writing-or to one part of antiquity, or to only some of the words involved ..s In general, the philological studies have limited themselves t~ one language, one realm of discourse, or one period of time, and have not considered the words in the broader context of cultural history . My enterprise, then, is to integrate the aims of previous philosophical and theological studies wilh Ihe methods of the philological studies and to avoid the shortcomings of both ; thus ( I) to study the term " history" as a member of the Gu.:ek, Latin, and thence of our own intellectual vocabulary; (2) to determine, through the study of the term , the content and development of the idea of history in antiquity ; and (3 ) through the determination of the history of the idea of history, to learn something about the cultural transformation of the ancient world (a) as a detailed study of the specifically intellectual relationship between Graeco-Roman and Judaeo-Christian cultures and (6) as it reexamination of the popular linear-cyclic account of the idea of history in the two cultures. This is, therefore, a study in the history of ideas or the history of culture; for, rejecting customary limitations of language, realm of discourse, and period of time, it focuses on Ihe impact ofJudaeo-Christianity on Graeco-Roman ideas . It is also, I believe, a philosophical inquiry because its aims and consequences are properly philosophical- self-knowledge through a deeper underTII",Dlliu hell Sp,tultn! (Lcchte: EmMellcn, 1943). H . Rupp and O . Korhlcr, " Hino,;a, Guc hichte," SD«II/M1II 2 (1951) : 249- 72. See ,1..1$0 G . Stadmucllcr , .. Aion , Sattulum," SIUOIIM1II 2 : 31~-20. I have been unable 10 find the ,1.rtidc by A . •· rcnkian t"hnWQ, ImOQiw, 1010(110," R. dts EIMtin IUII-EllroptOl I (1938)] that is mentioned in a bibliograrhy of Ihe author. I am unable to read J. WikaJjak's 5hort article on the history 0 /tiSl"ri" in Fil"",al" (1962-63), pp. 204-9. .. In his study or the iIIndent idea of philotogy, Heinrich Kuch IICCS ill similar focus as proper, and similar problems with some of the previuus literature (P/tif.lollU (Dculschc Akad . d . Wissensch. Berl ., Sckt. fiir Ahenumlwissen$ch., 48. Berlin, 1965) , p. 6J .
w
Uta of History
standing of the history of our cultur~\'c:n if its method and subject malleI' are unfamiliar under the ruhric " philosophy."H 11 is nOI (merely) semantic history- though it may be an exercise in historical semantics-because this term " history" is, as I suggested earlier, a warp-thread in the fabric of the modern inlellectual world and because the history of its meanings is. therefore. to be observed only in the broader context and to be understood as a development . al onct' determining and determined by other ele ments in this context, not as a mere succession . This is also no t a stud), ill the history of hislorjography ; because the uses and meanings of the term art' nOI restricted to history writing. The idea of history as a parI of the inl("lIectual vocabulary of culture is surely invol\'cd in what his torians do; but it is also involved in other inte llectual and practical pursuits, such as oratory , philosophy, and politil:s . And th(' origins of the term antedate history writing. Morem·er. Ih~ his to ry of his turiography ~xceeds the limits of the idea of history; it is a significam hu t seldom observed fact that such "his torians" as Thucyditlt·s and Livy do not call their works " his tory" and do not so characteriz(' their res('arch methods ,48 Finally, this is nOI a s tudy in th(' speculativ{" p hilosophy or theology of history; that is, I d o not intend to examine me merits of claims that history has this or that pattern or meani ng. or. for that matter. the claim that it has neither pattern nor mean ing. Such claims will be of interest here only insofar as Greek, Roma n. Jewish, or Christian Quentin Skinner's obsel"ation ("Meaning .nd Understanding in the HiJlol")' of Ideas," 11 & TII8 ( 1969) :53J on t~ ,'alue of the hislOryof ide.s I!. worth quoting al lenRth : "The . lIeJlation that Ihe hiuOI)' of ideas t"{)lUiSLS of nolhing mort" Ihan ' OU I worn metaphysical nOltonl" which il fr"lue-ml)' ad'·.nttd III the moml'nt. with terri· fying parochialism, as a reason for iRnoring such a history, would tho:n come- 10 bt scen as tne very reaSOfl for regarding such hiJlori,.s as indi5penubl ~' ' rl'lr"ant', not b«a.use crude 'lessons' can bt pictf'd o ut of th~m , but b«au$e the- history itsc-If provides a lesson in 5t'lf-1r.nowledg" . To d.-m and from th" h;5101")" or thOllghl a solution 10 our own immediale pt"aclical prnbl,.ms is Ihlls to commit not mue-I)' a mf'thodoIOfl;:' ieal fallacy, but somt'thing li kt' a mnral error. 811\ to lta,n from the- past- and wecannot olh('rwise learn it at all- tht' distinction bc ...·t'1'11 what is ne-c,.,sary and what is tht' product mert'l y of our own cOntinR"nl arranJle-mt'lI ts. is to ],.arn Ihl' kt')I 10 ".If-awareno:u itselr." .. An instructive- comparison may Ix drawn bc-tw,...n H ~rodolul .I1d ThuC)·did,.,. Ht'rodotus ust's tmo()£iv, lm:oQln and ImOQlx~ rt'iati"t'ly rrequ .. nt ly lsome nineteen times: Kt' J . E. Powt'iI, UJliaJ"It HnNoln ... (Cambridg r: C.ambridge Univ~uity Prt'$S, 1938), p. 1741, and US" them \0 d o:"llcribt what h~ is doing. Thucydidu. by contrast, does not use the- worn, a lil1J1I" tim" I""" M. H . N. "on usc-n, lNitJl T1l1mydid~ (Berlin: Weidma nn, 1887)1, but rather, US" tll .. languagt' of reason anet logical inference; sce Jacqueline de- Romill )', H ill8ir, tl RllufJJI t~'( 1'ItIltjN/id, ( Paris: Uo$ Iklle. lcures, 19!J6). II
Introduction
21
writers might be found to make such claims a bou t history . Indeed, the crucial question, in light of the prevailing linear-cyclic account, will be whether an yone in a ntiqui ty did think that history was linear or cycl ic, meaning ful or meaningless. And , in fact, this stud y yields results quite d ifferent from wh at is widely beli eved . The idea of history that underl ies the uses of the ancient words [moQ£a , hiJtorill, and the like throug hout an tiq ui ty, and among C hristians as well as non-C hristian G reeks and Romans, was either a n inform a tional account (or the informa tion itself) about ~rsons, natural things, and huma n customs, or social and poli tical events, o r a written account a bout events either specificall y or generically; that is, the literary genre called "hi story." By the end of the Hellenic Age both of these modes of usage exi sted . In the H ell enistic Age the la tter was clea rly domina nt. U nder the ead y Roma n Empire the modes returned to a bala nce, while the limits of the subjects perm itted in a history were relaxed a nd th e previously required accuracy or factu ality d eclined ; history is understood as story both in the cultural ma instream and in the apologies of the early Christians. Und er the la ter Roma n Empire the growing estrange ment between the Greek-speaking and Latin-speaking worlds appears in the divergence between the uses of history in G reek and La tin. In Greek, histo ry continues to be used as story by the Christians both in the apologies and in the exegetical wri tings that showed the various meanings tha t a Bible story might have besides the lit era l one, the one which was " according to history." In La tin the same a pologetical and exegetica l uses are made of history by the Christia ns; b ut the implica tion of fa ctuality is restored . So tha t the same account which is a history is taken to have some o lher meaning, to commu nicate or ex press some· thing besides the facls. Finally, Augustine articulates in his D~ civitall Dei the d istinction, adumbrated a mo ng his contem poraries , between the account of the past events of the J ews and C hristia ns and tha t of the other nations, that is, between sacred a nd profan e history . It follows from this that the linear-cyclic accoun t seems incorrect, using as it d~s a definiti on utterly alien to a ntiqu ity. Although there may be, in some transhi storical sense, a logical con nection between the idea of lime and the id ea of history, the a ncients, as a matter or historical fa ct, did not see them as con nected; they occasionally reflect on the nature: o r time, never on the nature o r h istory . Whil e some writers of historical works say that even ts (t o. n QoyE'(6vo'ta, res gtlttU) repeat themselves and some philosophers specula te about cos-
22
mi c cycles. then' ar€' al so OIh(,f \'ie ..... s expressed and no o ne says that his tory is circ ular, rep«= titiuus. Of m ('a llin~l('ss. The Greeks and Roman s were not pessimislic ahou! history . nor did thrir \'iew ofhis lory fail to sati sfy their spiritua l Iw('ds. On Ih(' olhe r hand . lhe ancient Jews and C hristia ns . whatt·\'t'r lh<,y ma y han- thought about Iht'
creation and cnd of the world . did nm think Ihal hi story was
recli ~
linear and uniqut'. The)" w('n' 1101 ('s puialty upt imistic ahout histo ry. 1I0r was their vi('w of his tury spiritually sa tisfying. Fru m their own poin t ofvi('w Iht")" WIT!' nOI ('Il){iI/otin,lot i .. s pn'ulat iull ahoul the nature and meaning (If hi story . All of Ihest:' denials an' has('d (Ill and mOl\" ht" rt'dun-d to two fundamental ncgaliw ins ights ahou t th~ d('\"('lopn1l'TlI or Ih(' id~a or his· tory in antiquity : tirst. till' idl'a of hi story was nof all influential and rormative idea in antiquity as il has h l'TII sinn' thl:" R l:"na issanc(";'~ and second , in antiquity his tory was 1101 thOlI.lthl to ht, a r("al ("ntity, capable of txhihitin~ a patttTlI . ha\'inlo: a Illt"an ing. ins piring hopt'o or possess ing a mllun'. I ( is often sa id that his tory l 'onlt'S to ht' SI'(' n as mraningiul and goal-dirl'ctrd undl'r thl' imparl of Christianity . This is true, hU1 not in tht' SC I1Sf' in wh ich it is usually mcam . H islOry ca me to bc seen as meaningful as :t rI'sult 1I0t "rrdll'l"tiOI1 011 tht· dt'tails Hr C hristian belief, but of apolflg"ctkal disputl's with tll(' nun-Christ ian Gr('('ks and Ro mans: the idt'a of history as ~ual-direc t ed is not so much tht'ologil'al as rht'tori("al. It" tht· ori.l{inal utility nr this dl ,wgt'd idt'a nf hi sto ry was rhetorica l. hnwt·\·(·r. it has ntnlt' \0 hr transl('rrt,d to tht, n.-aim u f inquiry in mock"rn sodal t!u'i ll'it·s. philusophit's. allel tlwologies uf histo ry , And altho ugh thl' id,';1 wa .~ [.lIld is ) adl"I"all' ti)r p"lt-mil'al purposes, it has ht,t'" " sou rn' of persist!'''1 pl"Ohl('l11s whl'n put to o lhc r u s~s, or whic h tilt' qU" s l lilT ulldt' rS talldill~ is lInly n!H', Tu put thc' poinl som('what mort' spt"(:ifil'ally , whill' tht' ,'jc'\\- th;1I hisltJry is ~tJal direc tt'd may he adrquatc' wlwl1 it is usrd tu win adht' Tt' nts , it poses prohlems when it is rmployt'd in sc)("iat tlU'tlril's that pn'scrib(' actions o r in phil uso ph ic~ that purpurt In olli.'f Itll d n standing or knowkdKt' ,
"~t
M . I . t'inltY. " ~I rt h . ~I"nlury alld Hi SI.,r~' ." II « n .. 1 1 !16~'::l81-3O"1 : cf. P. ~t un>!. .. History:. ncl M )'I h." Pltifll.!OfJftirllf QIIII,lu(I' ,; I 1956 I : 1- 16,
11 History as Inquiry in the Hellenic Age
"history" is a tra nsliteration of the Lati n word hi!toria, itself a transliteration of the Greek [m:og(o . An examination of the idea of history in an tiquity must therefore begin
T
HE
ENCLlSH
W ORD
with the meanings of the term {cn:OQIO. But latOQlO is just onc mem· ber of a family of cognatt words tha t includes the verb LmoQELv and the adjective lcnOQlX61!j: . All of these originate from the ancien! word [mwQ. and. since lO'tOQElV, [crtoQ(o. a nd tCTtOQlxO; are not 3Ut:Sled in the earli est surviving texts, the inquiry may begin with imWQ. The earliest occurrence oflO"twQ is Iliad 18 a t Ihl'! beginning of lhe descri ption of the wondelS l-Iephaistus wrought o n the shield he made
for Thetis' "doomed son," Achilles. On this great shield he fashi oned the earth , hnvens, sea, and stars, and on the earth two cilies; in the one, people are ga thered in the agora because there is a dispute in progress belween two men over the blood -pri ce of a slain man. T o resolve the dispu te the men go btt rO"tOQl, which is ordinarily translated " to a judge, arbiter, umpire, or referee." 1 Simila rly, during the funeral games for Patrodus , Ajax and Idomeneus get into a dispute over who is leading in the chariot race; and Idomeneus challenges Ajax , saying: Come then,
Let U5 put up a wager of a tripod or a cauld ron, 1 /1. 18.499_501. The proper interpretation or th is whole pan age has been debated;
cf. Lcar, }HS 8 : 122" ., and Murray in the Locb edition of the Iliad, Vol. I, p. 324, n . I. Where not olherwiK indiClil tcd the transla tions are my ow n.
24
lrita of Histo~r And make': :\!{arncmmlrl . SOli or :\l rt lll! , ",itn ('~.s [latO(Klllxtwl!C' n us As 10 whic h horSC's ltad. And wht' n you plty. ~'UU wi ll find OUl .!
In hOlI! passages the imwQ is 1I1It'" whu adj udi cates a diffc rC'nce of opi nions between two pa nics:II Iht' rl'qu('sl orlhe panics t he mselves.
More preciseJ}', he decides a caSt' in whi ch cnn lJicting accounts a re given by the disputants about some thing di sti nct from hut of interest to bot h of them . And tht' dispute.', ur thl' s u~j('(' t of il. is a lso of great emotiona l impact upon ils ;t udi('IIt:(, or thr l"o mmull ity in whi ch it occurs ..l The di spuI (' nel"'cen Ajax and IdumC'lH'us pOrlf'nds a splil in the ranks of th e H r llent·s ~II j ust t ill' moment when their ten-rear stalemated siege of Tray is ahou t 10 s u c'('I' fd . Tht' dispute O\'fr lhe blood·pricc:, too, is emot iona lly ('hargrd . as l'3n he infr"rrt'd both from the fac t that the pc:uplt are ,I(at ht'n'd a!)tlll l rooti ng for une man or Ihe other and from obs('rvali{)1I of the im porTance a ttached by other primitivc: occidcntal dvili;..atilltls In Ih(' payment of blood·pricl!' a5 an instit ution for mainta ining t,:j"i(' peacc:} E\'idently. then, the tOtwQ is onc whose authorit}' in d('ddinlot s uch disputrs is well known; hf' is good a t such things. It is in Ihis eOl1\'(' nlinnal sensr', rather tha n in an y official sensf'. t ha t thr m lf' I,flh(' lOl'WQ is on(' ofarnitration . And what he determint's is ..... hosr a("C'Ounl fir Iht' rnallt'r at issut' is the more acc uralt': so that Ih,' result of h is adj tld ieatioll ill a maller of' law is j us tice and in a mall('r fir p{"rcf' ption ;tc('urale information . He is pe rce pti\'e or judidous. It i .~ in this srnst' that Hesiod says of the [mW{' . p.cu,a YUI! t£ voov 1tEllu)(aop.tvo~ tadv. th at he is sound· wilt('d , mat u red in mind. u r ..... isf' ..· Similarly . the .....ord is used adjec. ti" ally in a H omeril' H ymn etn 10 drsrrib(' Ihe a bilitirs of the t\·lust's as to,[OQEt; tPbilr;. knowlrdg('ahle fl f \\'I'll s kill ed in song." Here too the 11. 23.4115-87 . Th~ In. nsla lion is l.all illluft·S. Mllrra\' t1~b ) rrndrrs Ihr ronciud· ing phrase. ivo Y"Wn; MOl{VIlJ\', mort liltr:llIy: ~I hat thou ma yt'.ll [tarn b~' pa ~' ing Iht pricr .~ ' Thi~ is a puint Iha l is u~ualt y mis~r,1 ill a,'('''lWI 5 nr iutW{l and Ihr origin of lotoQdv alld 10000OQia . as ro, "J(ampl,' h~' Pohl.. ,,/. I Jlm)t/lIl. d" ItSII G'JLlli(JrIu(/l"i~, ifS ..lbfndllllldrJ (Btrlin: Ttubntr. Ht:l 1) . " . HJ : " (011l.1Q i~ 1 ul sprunl!lkh drr Z('ugr. d u t lWU gtsehtn hal. 11110 noch
(l/ .
J 8.50 I ) .~
'This is a repea trd fa us.. of lil i.l{alion ill (h .. Sa~" '!t' IJ"' 1I1 ;\j«/ a nd of b"'lIlr in ikDwfllf. Ln ci te only 1"'0 instan(' ... ~ . ' Hrs. Op. 793. I.allimorr Iranslal..,,: "wc-It·a rm...! with hrairu. " • Trans. E.·.. I ~· n.\\·h iL ... /L..nrb); d : Barrh~' J.. Epul . 9.-44 : tntW'V iO'toQ£C; XOUQO L.
History as Inquiry
25
word indicates being notedly good at giving or knowing how to give an account of a certain kind . In aIJ of what remains of those earl y Greek attempts to give accounts of the natural or human world, the " pre-Socratic philosophers" and the logographoi, lmwQ and its cognates are found but three times.' In the testimony of Clement of Alexa ndria , Heraditus held the opinion that wisdom-loving men must be Et, IlUAa no)J.wv to10Q0.~ . 1 Freeman, following Diels, renders this phrase "inquirers into very many things,'" a tran slation that seems to derive less from the earlier meaning of lCJ"noQ itself, which has already been examined, than from the lex icon definiti ons of cognate words of later coinage, namely lmOQElv and {otoQ(a. But whether one read s "inquirer" or (merely) " ~rceptive," which wou ld accord with the results so far, this occu rrence would be m OS I interesting. For it would suggest already a " philosophic" interest in that kind of knowledge which went by th e name of history, were it not that another fragm ent of Heracl itus declares that " Pythagoras, son of Mnesarchus, practiced LotOQ£l) most of all men, and making extracts from these treatises he compiled a wisdom of his own, a mere accumulation of learning (:nohlla9ll) , and poor workmanship (xa'XO'tEXV\Tl ). "10 'lmoQbl here indicates the collecting of accounts or of information and deriving therefrom one's own account. The new word lmOQlTl is thus dearly rela ted to totOOQ, which indicated knowing how to discriminate between competing accounts of something and in that sense being good at account-giving of a second-order sort . And importa ntly Heraclitus rej ects this activity, eq uating it with polymathy, as not only wronghcaded , but also pcrniciousY
The other thr« cita lions lis ted in the Ditls-Kranz ~ Regi5le r" use tmOQlo in nei· ther dirtel nor indiuct quotation, bUI rathe r, in the surrounding literary contexl, and ther~rore ma y not be sp«ifically a uri but«l, i.e., 10 Aeu~i l aus or 10 H teatae u$. • D- K', I : 159; Fr. (22) B35 - Clem. AI. Slrom. 3. 14 .140 (Di ndor/) . cr. Porph. A6sI. 2.49 : lmtoQ yQQ ttoUw-v 6 mwo; .IA~o; . T~ wording ma) be C lemenl's; bUI Wilamowiu (Phil. Unlm. I :2 15) considers Ihe plluse genuine:, and it is thus used bere. I Fucman, AMil/« 10 /Ju Pm«ralit: PltiloJ¥km (Odord: Blackwell, 1962), p. 27. ~ D-K', I : 180; fr. (22) BI 29= D.L. 8.6. R. D. Hicks (Loeb «I. oro. L., 2 :325), however, translates: " ... and in this scltetion of his writings made: himself a wisdom of h is own, showing much learning, bUI poor workmanship." 11 Heraditus' dislike of x ol.uJlQ9 t'l is also alienee:! by ~·r. 40: " Polymathy don nOI teach understanding, otherwise it would have taugh t Heslod, Pythagoras, Xenophanes, .. nd HeCltaeus" (trans. Wheelwright). I
26
Uta A similar idea seems
10
of lIiJto~,
underlie another cognate that appears for
the firs t lime in the pre-Socratic li u:raluTe, Ihe verb {(JtOQE~\I. Ikmocrilll S says: "~ I have travellrd most cxtcnsi\·cly of all m('n of my time, have pursued inquirirs (i,OtoQEW\! ) in tht' most dis tant places . and haH seen the most climes and lands. and have heard the greatest num~r of learned mt'n ; and 110 OI1C has en:r s urpassed me in the compOl;ilion of treatises with proofs:" ! He r(' 100 what is suggested is getting the acwunt right, t hough as dist inct from thf' earlier occurrences of tCJtwQ and totO(lITj . iO'tOQElV. a \'('rh. stems more 10 indicate the activity or pruCt~ss of gelling tilt. right account or getting the account righl. 11 is in Ihis !it'ns!" that onr should understand the usual tran slations of this pa ss a~(' ano of (OlOQEIV gt'oerally as "making inq uiries" or " pur,>uing illquiri('s:' tt Al1d inttr<,stingly. De mocritus, unlike Heraciitus, s(·t'ms tu think hi.lil:hly of this kind of knowledge. There is ont' rt'maining (K't'urrcnc(' of lO'toQiu in these writings. According to th(' later Epkurc·an. Philodrmus. a logo,(lraphfll named Naus iphanes di stinguisht's nl:twn:n lOlOQ(U a nd " knowledge of the facts" (dO'lOlS '[Wv 1tQuYJ.l.Q'[l!)v), sa ~' illg , " For he says Iha( the cause of the power to persuade aris('S not from lm:OQlU but from knowledge of the fa cts; so that just as h(' Ise. the lIatural scil'ntist, cpuol)(6r;J persuades thesf me n, S I) might hr pcrsuadf any group of men . "11 This usage s('ems to ht, at vilrian(,(, with that oftO'twQ. l(rmQElv, and IOtOQlu earlier Im . Hul the t'xprcssion dbTJOlS '[Wv 1tQaYIlQntJv is so unlike an ything in the prt"-Socratil' remains tha t it se<,ms more likely a paraphras(' or all rxampl(' of th(' I
rh,
Phitip Whatwright. P"JlKlatiCJ (Ncow York: Od yuty, 1966), p. 186: ,,'rtC'· m~lI , Alfrilla. p. 119. 11 Fr. (75 ) 8 2. D _K l . 2, 249, 3- 5 '" Phld. HI! . :.1 . 19, 1- 20. 7 (col. :15); er. I. 299,1 - 7 (col. 25). 11 Von Arnim, howC'\'tr. UCtp l5 thr rtading all gconu;nC' jI....IHII du Difl !lOll P""sa (Btrlin . 1898). p . 48/. IJ
,,,"' If,.A,
Hislory
DJ
Inquiry
27
In the earlier period {mooQ indicated the qua li ty of skill in , percep· tiveness at, or knowing how 10 choose belween compeling accounts of something, a second-order sort orknowing. In the fifth ccnlUry tmrop is used as "knowing" of a first·order, direct·acq uaintance sort, although it is still a knowing of Ihe facts . Euripides' King Thoas , for example, threatens to punish the women ta<; t&vb' lO'tOQ
Soph. El. 850.
I. e ra. 4tl68 , 407C; cf. Nauck, TGP, Fr. 2 of Apollonidel (aplltl Slob. 22"7 H en~) : "fW(lU
5« no .... 8.uno S ncll, rGF, Vol. 1 ( 152), I t Soph . OT 1484. to EUT. Tro.
troubles.
F/",. 67, 6: 4.
.·r. 2.
261. Similarly. i\esch. PV 632, the Chorus ...... nI5 tu inquire abou t 10 ',
28 sion of Ihe S10l)' of Helen given h y the Egyptian pries ls [OtoQEovn, il
being inquired of them,ll There is anothe r use of Iht" wrb in H c rodOlus: 10 mean inquiring an a CCOlllll of the r.,c ts abou t natural phenomena. He says, in Ihi!\ sense, tha t he has lold us ('wry lhin.~ that he cou ld find out about the Nilr-'s course tn' ooov IlQxpO'tatOV tOtO{)EUvta, hy inquirin~ as lengthily as pos s i b l(' . !~ Possihly a th ird kind of factual account lor which onc might inq uire, again in Ht-rndotus. s l'(' m s to relatl' 10 onc's thoug hts or mOl ;\'cs. Thus Da rius' hand is s lopped on its way to assassi na te the M agi usurpt.' rs a nd askrd (im6QEov ) wi th what inte ntions they have (omt' tn th(' pa lan',!! The re is anotilC'r ~roul) (If tls('s. pt·c ul i.tr to the dramatists. discinguis hed from the pr("crding by it s quest for indi vid ua l faclS rathe r than connected aCl:nu nts; illlrres lingly all mTurrenccs of thi s usage rclalr 10 indi vidua l la(' ls ahulII 1X'r.\ons a nd , in the fi rst placr, 10 the faclS about 0 01"5 parenlagr . A s Ihr ctrnourmrn l a pproaches, for ex· ample, Oedipus tells the o ld Ilt'rdsman that his offrn sc lies in not a nswering l OV nail) ' QV OUTOS: lOlOQEi. whal he- asks a houI the c hild .t l Sim ila rl y Euripides' Ion is ~oi n g to inquire l [otoQ~OllJ ) of Phochus who his fa thrr i!>, :" and Orrs ll's ('llIIsicit-rs it honorable of Athena , ha l i010QEls:. you inquire aner his falhcr. '''; If one may inquire li)r individu al lac ts a bou t onc's pa rentage, so 10(), s till in thl" dramati sts. filii' may ioquirt' fo r someone. ask his whereaboUl s. So it is that Or('strs says hr is trying 10 d c te rmior (lot oQW) whe re Aegis thus lin's ,:; I.ikc ..... isl· OH'stt'S declares himself to Menelaus: " I a m Ort'stes QV imoQdS:. whom you seek, Mene laus."1II And the verh may r\'{'n he- us{'d to ind ica tr asking a ye-s·or-no ques· tion abou t a mallrr of fa ct: thus He rod otu s rela tes that th e second wife of the Iyrant Pi sis tra t us tllld her mother that ha new husba nd had held wrongful iOle rmurs(' with hn . although Herodot us corn· ments that he does flot know du lmoQEu
lIu/ory as Inquiry
29
Besides these uses of latOQElV to indicate inquiring about matters of fa cl, there are also two occurrences in the fifth-century materials that seem to indicate not the activity of inquiring but, rather, the upshot of it, finding out or discovering, or, as the lexicons suggest, " knowing by inquiry ." The first of these is from Aeschylus' Agamtmnon. The herald hopes for the return of Menelaus: At least if some beam or the 5un tcnO(?Ei him Alive and well , by the design of Zeus, Who is not yet minded utlerly 10 destroy the race, There i5 some hope that he will come home again . Hearing 50 much, be assured that the truth is as thou hearesl. JO Similarly, according to Heroda tus , e roesu! t4>QOvtll;E [mOQEwv, bethought himself to discover who were the mightiest of the Hellenes .l' The first passage is closely related to the use we earlier saw of inquiring for someone's whereabouts, the activity here transferred to a sunbeam; but in this occurrence the fact that the passage is a conditional requires a rendering more concl usive than just "seeking" or " looki ng for" Menelaus, if hope is to be a suitable response. Thus LmoQElv in the fifth century may, in passive forms , indicate the facts for which one is inquiring, but primarily it means 10 inquire. Likewise the primary meaning of the noun {mop(a is an instance of this activity, that is, an inquiring. When Herodo!us, in his discussion of geography, passes from what is based upon his own observa(ion to what is based upon his study of Ihe chronicles of the Egyptian pries ts, he states that so far what he has said arises from his own seeing (lhpu;) , judgment (yvWp.'1)' and (moplo.l1 Th~ Liddell- Scott lexicon sugges ts " a learning or knowing by inquiry" as the primary meaning of the no un ; and they offer two citations of Herodolus as paradigm cases of that meaning . In the first, Herodotus is trying to sort oul the confli cting accounts of Helen given by Homer and by the Egyptian:". He !lays: But when I asked the priests whether the Greek account (Myoc;) of the Trojan hU!liness were vain or true, they gll.vc me the following answer, '10
Aac h. A,. 676--80, trOl.ns. Smyth
~dcscriet ."
.. Hdl. 1. 56. 1-2. ~ Hdt. 2.99. 1
(Loeb).
Hu t Morshud ( Random Hou$e) ,
30 ~'.I\"i n )(
Ihal , h l" - had InUI) wha t Mt'-
ul'iaus l, il1lSC'lf IIad
~; I id . , I
And having complt,tl"d his rf'td li ng. h('
.~ a ys ;
T I,,'\ p.t· .. lilt" I'r i t'~ l s l ";111 1 111:11 ~"IU(, fl l lhl'~' Ih i l1!o(~ till" klll'l' h I illIl ui rilll-: (UTTI'iK!l'fL .. , im'T'Tmrtlull. h w that tilt"- ' 11tllrd in th r ir m , '1I COU IlI t\', tI
In bol h passages lO'tOQlflOl sec-ms tn hr;l da ti ve Qfm t' a ns. describing only the mt"a ns by which Ihr knowkdgt· was acquired ; ,he knowledge itself is ind ica tcd by dbEv(U ill til t' fi rs t passage and hy bdmoOeOl
in th e second. 1n both of Ihl'st' l' o nt C'X IS lOlOQio mea ns only an inqu iring. a n instanc(, of thl' Ml i"it )' ind icated h y lhe \'('rh {moQEiv . There arc some instanc('s, IUlWr\'(' r, in whi ch {cnop(o may mea n the results of inqui rinli: Uf, mort' pfn:ist'ly, informa tio n or accurate info rm
History
aJ'
Inquiry
31
mainder of the passage shows, is the ways of understanding the world of those who are today called pre-Socratic philosophers, but whom Aristotle called q,UOll(.Ol, evidently following Plato in considering that their concern was solely or largely to understand q,ilOl<; nature and natural phenomena. The use ort(1'[oQLa here clearly accords with that of the verb as inquiring an account of the facts about nalUral phenomena: an inquiry into such facts , though here the scope is broader than any single phenomenon or class of phenomena. Socrates, however, was interested in inquiring into the causes (ah(a) of natural things; and so he finds this "natural history," which merely obtains fa cts, unsatisfactory, and hence rejects it as philosophicall y insumcien!. It should ~ clear thal the basic idea underlying all the uses of (mooQ , lO'tOQEiv, and {(1'[oq£a is that of inquiring for the facts, with the: ordinary implication that what the facts really are is unclea r or disputed to begin with. It may be noted that the uses of the verb far oUlnumber those of the nOUII and that among verb uses there are more active than passive ones. These twO observations jointly suggest that what "history" means at this time is primarily an activity, inquiring, and only secondarily an object or product, Ihe results of inquiring, kno ....:I· edge in some sense. h does nOl yet indicate it kind of writing, a n a11. Insofar as what Herodotus is doing is indic-dted by his referring to it (J.1.I) as £aTopiTt, one should undel'S(and the word in its ordinal),
32
Uta
~f HiJIO~Y
sense, as a word indicating knowlcdgf' Clr Ihe a.cqUlSlllon of knowlf'dge of a certain kind . h could still b{' usrd in its older sc: nsc as the res ults of inquiring, an account 01" Ihe <"orr{'cl information, thr. correct account. In his famuus sJ>CI'l'h "On tilt' Crown:' for example. Demosthcnes speaks (If the ~reat bC'nclil that .hl' Athenians will derivc from lCTtOQtU of public aflairs. 1M UuI Hr-rodolus had describt"'d his wrilings, in accordance ....·ilh ,h(' !latun' of their ('on lcnIS. as lO'tOQl1'l.:f'1 And pt:'rhaps hy mista kl', ur Pf'rhilps from S(lmr OIh,'r cause. this descTipli v(' use of t he noun is transform!'d intn a d('nominati\'(' one, t<JtOQlO a!<> history writing .~' Thus Aristoll(~ points oul that wh('reas books of travf'l (ui nir; yi'Jr; l'tEQlObol) ,Ir(' U1H'ful lilT law-making , "at 1:WV nEpt 1:a ~ nQi.t;EI; YQolitic;d d,'hau's, 11 And !socrates, who is elsewhere reported tn ha w taught his tory writing as a di stin ct genre, says in hi s Panathrna ic spt·.·r h that it will ht' diffi cult for th(' audience 10 understand ht'callst' it is .ia m-packcd I yEJ.l0vta) with iolOQla and 41'),,0004>(0 , philosophy.'! By this lime . e\·idrntlr. both philosophy and hi story are recognized and reasonahly dearly drfinl'd dt'partmf'nts of intellectual culture. And there is further evid(,II L(' flf this 1101 on I\' in Ari stotle's distinctions between thl' kinds of plut ! J.lu90;: ) appropriate for an epic and a his tory, th(' former bei ng wncrrnl'd with a unit), of aClion , !ht' latter wilh a unity nf lim(,,,'1 hut also in hi s lamoU5 and mu ch debated .. l>cm. Cm', IH. ,. While Ikrl)t1,~ us 1.~tS tplI' rh"p~ 1J;lrll\ !i,l' 'h~ ,'t';ISlIII) r.lt l~id('rt'(1 Iht· I:uhcr ..r hi! tl)ry t""n in an[iqlli l)'. h~ wu al"" \ ;1 P(opos th .. ti'llamplt orThllcydidcs l consid trC'd a lia r bv (Titics unlil [hr ~ ii'll' ttn lh crn1Ury; a nd . more r.. r rn , I)·, P. Trf",'I!S, " HrrodohlS, Grlon. and Ptrid..5," Cl' 36 \1941 ): ~2 1 -45. S« Momigliano, "Thr Plat .. of Hl'rodmus in Ihl' Hislory fir IlisloriO!l;raphy," llilfory 13 (1958) : 1- 13; no· printed in A. D. M Onli!(li,,"o. Stlldi,. ill H;JIO';fJ~rrlp~r fLo ndnn; Wtidenfrld and NicoiIOn, 1966), pp. 127- 42 . •' Th~t Htlodo1U' "id nOI "'t' lhl' Io'nr" i ll Ihi$ 1"lI~' i, I"tr()lI'ni:tl'd hy I'ohlenl., Htr060t. p . 44 . ' 1 Mi1l. Hh . 1 36Oa3~-3 7 . " h oc:. Pu . 14(•. The nalllrr .. "d ,·alu .. .,r ho.:ral" ' pI!i« (Pari,; Klincksitck, 196 1), pp. 42-46; IOr a morr vrinm [(ralmrnt.Jatll'rr, Paidt ill (NI'''' '1'01"11. : Oxrord U n"'.. r,;t)· PrI'U. 1944), 3 :46- 155, "!\rist. Po. 14 59a I 7- ~ .
History
aJ
Inquiry
33
distinction between historian and p~t as concerned rcspectively with what did happen and what might have happened ." On the one hand , then, lO"tOQia in this transitional period means a particular kind of intellectual or literary product- a " history" in very much the same sense that we would today ca ll something a history ; on the other hand , at least for Aristotle, it indicated a particular kind of philosophic or scientific activity . Earlier on, the noun had been used to indicate an inquiring into the facts about per-sons , things , or even ts. Aristotle develops the sense of inquiry into natural phenomena into a typically philosophical mode of inquiry by expanding the scope of the inquiry to the limits of the various closses of natural phenomena . Thus then: is for Aristotle, as there was al least for Plato's Socrates, a 1(£Ql q.uout)S to"toQ(a, history of nature .·~ and besides this there is a "tits 'VUXTlS {(J"[oQ'a, history oflhe soul,46 and l(J'[OQtm 1t£Ql tGw ~wwv, hisloril':s of animalsY Besidl':s history as a mode of inquiry, Aristotle even seems to think of LO"tOQla as one phase of other inquiries; for he says that it is according to nature (xata q.umv) to proceed to a discussion of causes when we have fini shed the LO"tOQia of details." Similarly, he describes a list of all the true attributes of an object as an lmop(a ." For Aristotle, then , lmoQCa has a special philosophic usage to indicate a particular mode or phase of inquiry into the natural world in its broader aspects. But while it is interesting to observe that the word was capable of being so employed in Aristotle's time, one must be wary of taking this as evidence of a great constriction of meaning. While Aristotle's usage clearly derives from the ordinary usage, it is speciali zed and philosophical , and thus 10 some ex tent idiosyncratic. Before proceeding 10 the Hellenistic Age, mention may be made of the adjective lmoQlx6s. In Plato's Sophist, a self-conscious neologism is committed in drawing a distinction between imitation based on opinion, which is called bo~O~lf.ll1nXtl , and imita lion based on ++ I bid. '451 a35-b6. for summary or the dehat c, $eC C . O . Brink, "Tragic History and Aristode'. Schoot," Ptoc. CfI'"I6,. PM/o/. 5..:., N.S. 6 (1 960) : 14- 19. ., Arisl. Cui. 298b2 . .. Arist. Dt lb . 402a4. "AmI. CA 716b31 , referring 10 his own work which, ~rhaps b<-cau$e or the$e rereren~s, has come to be called HiJlfITJ r1 A"i",als. Similarly: CA 717.33-34, 728bI3- 14; Rllp. 477a6-1, 418a21- 28. Or he may refer simply to " the histories": CA 719alO, 7fOal3, 746a15, 7Mlb31 , 7.53b I 7, 761alO, 763b16; and Rup. 418b!. .. Arist. HA 49hll - l l . ., Arist. APr. 46a24-27 .
34 knowh=dge ( btlan1~ll) . which is called " {(J'toQl)(~V 'nva Illll110 IV , a son of hislorylike imitation: "'" And Aris to tle says that in orde r 10 advise well about the economies of cit y-s tates, one need s no t only 10 have some gene ral views derivcd from onc's own ex pe rience, bu t a lso to be {moQut.6 v, well Vt'TSt'd , about what others have lea rned .)1 Both of t hese usages seem 10 dni\'l' from lltr n Ol ioo of LO'toQia as factual inqu iry or information-seeking. su tha t whatt:v('r is LC'lOQlXOS is faclual or informed . Tht" se(:()ud sorl ofimilalion. then, would be "a sort of informed im itation" anet Aristotle's ad\"ic(' is to I:H= "informed" about what others haw It·anU'd . This a Hribuli v(' u sa~t· of till' adject iv(, deri\'es from latOQlU as inquif)' or the res ults CIf inquiry . The adjrcliw' is a lso used o nce s ubsla nli vd y by Aristotlc in tilt' fam ous passagc of l ilt' Porl;{f.ll in which he disl inguishes bclween till' his!!)rian ( lOlOQlX6C;) a nd tht' poet . and which has already hccn diS('u!isj·o. The idea of history in tht· fift h n'n tury was dominalro by a sense of activity; hu t in Ih (' transi tiuna l period a reification aplXars to ha\'e begun tha l con tinues in tht· subst·<]uI·nt pc riod . History shifts from a n activity that onc perform s on ('('rtain kinds of objects wilh th e aim of oblainin,lt ct'rta in kinds nf r!'suh s-" I inq uirt' ''-to a s ubsistent r ntil )', inqu iry, unders wod as citllt'r a d istinc t and r(,cognizable (inves· tigativc) process- I f'nga!i{<' in (o r. prusc("ut<, j an inqu iry-or, perhaps , the wrinrn r('su lts or tha t pro('('ss, , ha l is. his w rit's, By Aristotle's lime tIlt' verh has l ' OIl\(' 10 takt' a srcllnda ry place to the noun . which now indicatrs nut so muc h tht' inq ui ring itself as Ihe r('sults of th at inqu iring. a o('rinahlt· surt (II' lit('ntry produn wilh ils own spe· cific uses, values . a nd trailS,
'.. PI. Spit , 267 0 - 1:: , " Arist, RII , 1359b:lO- ):l, \l !'riR P(J, 1459.117- 2'J,
III History as a Literary Genre: The Hellenistic Age
O IlANN GVSTAV DRQYSF.N ga\l~ th e name
" H ellenism" t o the pcriod of Greek civilization foll owing the death of Alexa nder lhe Grea t because he thought that 'EX).Tlvt.aTu( in Ihe Acts of t he Apostles (6 : I) referred 10 oricntali zed G reeks and that this blending of Greek wi th Oriental was the defining characteristi c of the age .. Su bsequen t investigation has shown that this interpretation of (he text of Acts is indefensible a nd that t~ G reeks ratlu:r th an the Orientals were the chief contributo rs to whatever cu ltural fusion occurred . Nevert heless it was Oroysen who in st igated the study ofl he period as a distinct period in the ancient world, and the name, however inappropriate, has become canonical.
J
I n 1836 Droystn called his work 011 the Diadochi and Epigoni GtMltidllt an Ihl/ar· U"'IU. He did not, or course, invelll the ttrnl. In the ! i:o:tctnth « ntury, J . Scaliger inlerprrtcd'Elloalot and ' EJJ.l1v tGto( in the n me passage as a contrast between Jews who u!('d Htbrrw and I~ who us«l Grrek in thtc synagog ue. D. Heinsiu!, on the oth('r hand , thoug ht Ihat Ihe Jewish' EU.I')VtO'to( used a special dialect (1i"J~/J /ul/arull((J ) which is identical with The language or thc Scptuagint. In the sevent centh century, C. Salmasius denied that this was a special d iale(l, but retained the term li"lltlt IwlltniJli((J ror O ld TCSTamtnl and New Testament Gruk . In the cip; hteen th century, J. G. Herder used ~ Hdlenis mus" to indicate the wa)' or thinking or Jews and other Gree k-speaking O ri('nla ls. And in Ihe ni ne teenth «ntury, J. Matter connected " Hcllenismc" with Ihc thoughl of Greek-speaking Egy ptian J ('ws. The classic accoun t orlh(' history of lhe term is R. LaqU<'T, Hdlarumru (Gleue n, 192!'1). On Droysen's/lwlI oonfu,ion .aboul lhe meaning oflhe term, ~ A. Momigliano, "J . G. Ornyu:n Or:twetn G r('cks a nd J('w,," HiSID'.! /1Nl 7ltor} 9 ( 1970): 139- 53. I
Uta
of . Hislorr.
Thr H e llenis tic Age, or Hellenism , was , from all accoums, an age of unprecedented cultural productivit y. At Athens, still the home of philosophy, the school s of Pla tu, AriSlollr. f:picurus . Diogenes the Cynic. and Zeno the St oic nuurish('d. pt'rpt·tually (,Ilgagrd in quarrels with each other and steadil y attrarlill~ numtx' r~ of stud('nts from all over the Greek-speaking ..... ork!. Blit Atlll"tls was 110 longer the ('enter of all Gret"k cultural life. With Ih(' l"Cl1I<jU{"sts of Al exander. intellectual acti\"it)· had rn-come intl"flliItiunal. Art and sc ience in th e H('llen ist i(' Age were c{"nterrd in Alexandria. Primarily Ihi!> may be attrilmlt·d In tht' ric h t'ndowmellls of lhe Ptolemit's. PlOl emy I f(lImdrd till" :\Im.(· um . " home for the Muses. as a workshop and training gwund Ii,r sd\\llars hip in all fields- apart from till" tu rmoi l of mundallr ncis u·IUT . Il h('('a ml' Ih(' rcr:ognized institu tion for ('stablishing ddinili\'(' I('XIS. pn'paring critical «iitions, and publishing OIlllhurilaliH ,'omlllt'II!l1ril's UII t'arli('r \\'riters. 11to lem y 11 Philadt'lphus ,j)und('d IllI' ~r(,'1I I.ibrary Ill' Alexandria , which ultimatdy ,'amI" \'rry Iwar its Ij,undcrs lnl(:uliun or col l(:c ling Greek literalllrt' in ils t'tHirt'IY : lilr it n!lllain('d perhaps 700,000 \'01umes when. in 47 11 ,1:. , it wa s hUTlwd durin ~ Ih(' ,I{('Ilt'rall'onflagrdtion o f tht: harbor d istrit' L In additiun IU Alrxalldria and Athr ns, howeHr, Pergam um , Antioch, wrrr It's.~I' r ,'rlltrI'S Ill' \'ig-UTOUS l' ultural lirr . .-\11 of these cities produced Utlt only wHrks Ilr scholaf'llhip and philosophy, hut a lso poetry. drama, and hili tory, as wdl as s tucl i('.~ of riwlOri C, grammar, mathematil's, astrunomy , nwdicillt', g-mgr:lph y, and techno logy . f'rcguenlly a \'ari(,IY uf tI\I'Sl' '\I'Tt' prudtll't'd hy a s ingll' pt'rsull .! Yet of all "f Ihis l'ultuml ,u·ti,·iI Y \'(TY litlk Tt'ma ins nesidt"s the Icstimon;t's Iha I il t.K:l'urrt'tI . I TIlt' philostl l>lw rs an' knu\\ 11 h~' a lew rragmellts and hy nulil:('s ill dllxo,l{filphit's. Iht'llIsl'l\TS sUT\';"ing onl )' in fragments in man y I'asr s, whkh allrihuu' llUm('rous wurks 10 the philosophrl'S. Of tht, man y histnri,lIls whnst' namt'S \\'t' know , , li rre Th.. li brarians "I' AI"x;lndril' :lr<' .... ' rt:pu"'!!: Zrnudutus. Apollunius uf RhodMl. (ta\<» th.. ru·s. Arisluphanr, or 8yzantium. "\p"lIun;u ~ ,hr IdO!l:rdph.. r. and Arisla r' chus . Callimachu s, Ihou,II: h n .. " .. r hrad Hr .h .. I.ihra ry, cl ...... up th.. first ('alal"l'tu.. of ils holdin,ll:s .... hich Pi.am alonr ran up to I'll) hooks. BUI lx-sidC'S Ihis h.. is t rc:d iled with works A.. C.lflulJ, C,ulINRJ ".f F."it" PHJ/II'f , Nil-m ~r ,11, Jl'tlI/d, .lion·, ls, and 0" ,"':rmplls. 10 nam .. on l)'" rrw . anrl abo \'" lul1l(,S fir Nml1r" a nd EpiX,tlIlfJ. ~imilarlr ('XI~n' 5i\'t: int t: II"(lu al alu,inmt:nlS ar .. :utri h ut",d 10 Ihr Stoic I'o,idunius of Ap
History as Q Littrary Gtnrt
37
are only fragments ; the sole work that has survived in anything like its integrity is Polybius' account in Creek ofthe rise of Rome. And so it goes for the greater part of the literary output of the age. In circumstances such as these it is not surprising to find that occur· rences of lmoQElv, imOQla, and tCJtoQU«~e; arc not at all widely disper· sed through the cultural remains; indeed, they occur mostly in the works of two writers, Polybius and Dionysius ofHalicarnassus, a lead· ing proponent of the first-century reaction against the degeneration of literary Greek that call ed itself Atticism . The confidence with which conclusions may bedrawn on the basis of such evidence will have to be qualified accordingly. Generally speaking, however, the uses of these words in Hellenistic writings continue and solidify the tendencies operat ing during the decline of the Hellenic period. The idea of history undergoes little change . 'IO'TOpla is still used in its older signirlCation as the facts or a factual account about some person or some important evenl in the person's life. It is so used by Dionysius , praising the continuity ofHerodotus's work, "even though he added a [moQla. ofXerxes' flight .'" Similarly, Polybius interrupts the main line of his Histories to give a description (tt;'\,YTIme;) of the Italian Celts, but he says he thinks that " the lmoQlav of these people") is worth remembering in order to understand the sort of people against whom Hannibal had to fight in nonhern Italy. The noull seems to retain its reference to natural facts throughoullhe Hellenistic Age, and indeed throughout antiquity.' According to Throphrastus, successor to Aristotle as scholarch ofthe Lyceum, Thales was the first among the Hcllcnes to "set fort h history about nature" (nEQl CPilOEO>c; tmoQ(av);' Plato 100 concerned himself "about history ofna· ture."B And at least within the circle of Peripatetic philosophers in the Hellenistic Age, factual inquiry about natural things seems to have been practiced and to have been called [atoQCa,9 meaning the racts or a ractual account about natural phenomena . • D. H . Pomp. 3. 14. ) Plb. 2. t4. 1- 2. ' f: 'lh Plb. 2.14.7; 4.40.3; and Thphr., fr. 12, in Dids, D O 4%, 17- 21 . I Thphr. Fr. I (D O 47~ , 10- 13). I Ibid . f'r . 9 (DO 484, 19-465, 4). ' To Theophrastul an:: attributed iJol4lficGi His/llri,s, Astrf)io,il:Gi Histllry, NllmtriClI1 H istoriu vf Gr/IfD1II, o-lri'GI HuIDri,S, Hislll'J IIf 1111 DiuiM (D. I.. ~ .46-.50) , and the dOllographical 0,. PJ,picGI Op;,till1U, whi ch may have been called 0.. Nllhtraf HiJID'J (Oiels, DC, Pro!., p . 102). Menon is said to ha ve written a history of medicine and Eootmus of Rhodes a NMmffll;Q/ H iJtoq, (;,o",,'ri( 1I1 HislQrUs, and AslrrHlI,iull His/Driu.
38
Idta
if Hi.s/o~)'
The re is a related and ver)' importalll occurrence in the first surviving trt'!3tise on grammar. that of (1)(' s('cond-u'ntury scholar Dionysius Thrax, a student of Aris tarchus. who succeeded Aristophanes of Byzantium as chief librarian at Alexa ndria . According to Dionys ius, the third of the s ix parts (If grammar (YQ
guages and histo ries .'" In antiquity. as in Ih(' !\Iiddlr Ages, "gra mmar" referred to halh lllf' tht'Ort,tical Of !It:ientifk slUdy of languagl!' (our "grammar") and Iht' first stagt· ill tlJ(' litera ry 1'1lu(.'al ioll ofa child (our "grammar st'hool "). Oftht, " parts" into which lJ;ony. sillS divided grammar. :;om(' arr scirnli li c and som(' p("dago~kal . But he is interested on ly in th(' sri,'lltifie. sn hr riot'S not {'xplain ..... hat h(' means by an "exposi tion ul'languagr s and his lOrics." What hr is talking about, though , is familiar to ;m yon(' who has takt"n a courst' in a classical language; the pedagogi ca l (t"rrain has nut c hanged much in twenty-fi\'e centuries .1! Going ov('r ('x('rl"lsrs or reading assignments. one comes across unfamiliar words or linguistit- forms and unfamiliar names of persons , places, obj('clS. or (,VI'nts. These til t" ( 'adler identi· fies. Such identification nf an unfamiliar .....ord of li nguistic 10r01 is still called , following tIlt" u sa~t' of th(' ;l1It"lt' nt ~rammarian s, it "gloss "; and the idrnlifi catiulI uf an unkno ..... n pt'rsnll , plaet'. nhj('ct. or event would consist in gi\'ing som(' f.u:ts Ilr information ahout it. 'ImoQlQ is thus he re bring llsrd, as in th(' Jlrect'ding ,l:('fOUp of uses, to indicate facts or a factual a('("f)Ullt, hut with a somewhat wider signi fica tion that includes, besidrs natural ()I~i('cts or phe n()nwna , pt'rsons, places, and events. H ere . then . history makes its modest debut in the t!dut:ational I:\lrriculum of Western civilization ; not as a discipline. a sci('n ct', or a body of knowledge, nor c\'('n as
History
tu
a Literary Genre
39
mars until the present time. The scholia on the passage of Dionys ius we have been discussing suggest that the ancient commentators understood latoQla more narrowly than Dionysius did . h is ex· plained as " narratives (bLl'JyT'UJ.ata)," the " narrating of ancient do. ings (l1w..aui.rv l't(Kll;toov a4rr\"('Ilm!!;)," and "the narration of affairs in earlier times (tTiv blT'l'Y'lOlV 'tWv l'tclAal l't(KlYv.ci'tWV)." 12 Although the scholiasts whose commenta ries have survived are much later than Dionysius Thrax , their explanations mark a development in the us· age of {O'tOQla that had already begun in the Hellenistic Age. In addition to the older and narrower use of the word as informa· lion about natural phenomena, and Dionysius' wider use as information more generally about whatever arises in a literary text, in the world of lette:rs {tnoQ(a more: onen has to do with social a nd political eve:nts. Polybius says, for example, that " the history of pas t events (tTJv ... itntQ 'tWv l'tQOYEyov6'twv ... LmoQlav) in Asia and Egypt has already been published many times a nd is well known."" Thus fa r the contexts in which {atOQla is used do not provide enough informa tion to make it clear whether history is the information about certain objects-such as natural things, persons, and the like-or an account of the information, the fa cts or a factual account . However, the uses exam ined so far in the Hellenistic materials seem to emphasize the matter or content of the history, its fa ctua lity. The second broad group of uses that may be discriminated in the period emphasizes the manner or form of the history, considering it precisely as an account . Where the first group concerns history as facts, a kind of knowledge, the second concerns history as an account, a kind of literature . T he beginning of this modal distinction between history as facts and history as account was in Herodotus' calling his work
Iomp"". Polybius regularly uses tatOQla as a referential term when he is reflecting upon the account he is engaged in giving. He says, for example, that a resume (tl;1i"('llOl!!;) of Greek history to the 140th Olym ~ piad is "appropriate to the arrangement of the history ( l'tQ6~ nlv 'ril!!; {O'tOQla~ cnNtQ;lV otxElav)." I4 These are the concluding lines of '1 &"";«
j"
Di.llpi; T1IrIKiJ A TltIIt Gr.smm«l;cam. Tht ci tatioos ar!:' rt3Iptctivdy rrom
Mdampos (or Dioml:'de5'; j" 14. 19: Sltphtn or Byzantium, p. 303.4; and Ht liodoru! . 470.4. On Ihe innutnct DionY$ius Tbra", set J ohn Edwin Sand y!, A Hutory of CJ/Usicat Sdtol"rslril' (New York: Hafner, 1958), I : 138-4{1. 11 Plb. 2.37.6; see also .s.31.6. "lbid . 3.118.2.
40
/dta of HjJIO~"
Book 3 of the His/onts and act as hisj ustificatOT), transition to Book 4 . The reference of imoQia to his accou nI as such is clear from the use of tl;frfrlOl'i 10 refer to the s uoordinal(, accou nt of Greek history.!'Similarly, Cha res of M)'t ilcne. who panicipa trd in Alt:xandcr' s journey 10 the East and afterward wrol(' an account of it , tells about the mmancc of Odatis, daughtt"r to the king of Maratho n, "as it has bt"en written (ytYQO.1ttOl) in the historiC's f( O'toQtm ~):' 16 The use of ytYQ<X1tlOt ma kes it dc-a r that tilt" historit"S r('f l"rred to art' wriUcn . Oionys ius of Halicarnassus criliciz('s Iht' pruse' style of Thucydidt"s for its excessive use of parentheses, of which Ih('n" an' a great many " in the entire iOtOQlUV." ' : And ht" (t"pC'atooly rc!t-rli to l'hucyd idcs' work as
lO"tOQia. IK Such uses tend to be more takr-n up with the mr-chanics of the account ~giving , organization and style, the account as a piec(' of lit· erature. The word is used stra ightforu'a rdly to indica te a piere of literature as such. What lmoQ(o evident ly signifies in this large group of uses, then, is a spcci('s of litera wrr.. a branch of cuhur('. Like other branches of cu llun·. history has its ow n special use and value. Aristotle sugges ted that histories w('re uscfu l for poli tica l ddiJr eration, unlike travrl books, which werr useful for legislating. Thur ydides supposed that, sincf" human cV('nlS ft'c ur. his work would bt' an inst ructive possession for all lime: Herodotus. ra ther dirrerent ly. wrote in order that mighty deeds might not lack renow n les t the rea· sons why the Greeks and tht, barbarians waged wa r against ('ach other be unknown . In the Hellenistic Age (and ('ven down to the prest'nt day) there seems to have been little doubt that the st udy of accounts of actions performed in the past along with the consequences that followed from them- the study of historical works----provides the student with a kind of experience of arrairs that may sen:t: as a correcti ve in the I) Polybius marks Ihe' distinCIKm bttwttn the' O\"e' rall narra ti\·t and some Ifut' r pari in the n m(' wa y at 2. 14. 1-2 and at 3.57.+.-.... using the infiniti\"(, t; lJviloaotku. See a lso Plb. 1.3.8; 2.37.3; 3.4.11, ....9, 58. 1; 4.1.2. 28.4: and 6.2.2- 3. But D. H. P, "'/'. 3.14 has bu'rt'10U; fOl'" the major, I(J'I"OQlO for the minor narr:/Il;'·, . Ii According to Athen. [ 13.35; 5758 - Jacob~', FI/(' ( 125) Fr. 5 ]. 11 D. H . A".". . 2. 15: s~ also 77t. 5. ilvaypO:4>oYt(~ {(J'(OQ10>; and Plb. 2.62.6; .... 33.2-3; and 8.9.2. ,I D. H. 71. 1.9, 16. a nd 41 : see al$(l.b/. Rom. 5. 11.3. He also has a rormulaic wa y of appealing for confirmation of his evidence to 01 )tOtvoi IcnOOiUl . Ih(' commonly known (published?) hi51orie5; Alll m. 1.:1 a nd 11. Para . 3 refers to Iht co mpilc rs of biog raphin (oi. tou>; JHov>; ilv6Qcirv U\1Yta~J.lEVOl ) .. nd 11 10 A I/his of PhilochoTUs.
His/ory
aJ
a Lilerary Gtnre
41
assessment of alternative courses of action. In this connection Polybius moralizes about the foolishness of mcn who, taking no precautions, allow their enemies to trade in their very marketplace, although they might acquire "such experience from history (b ti'j ~ (moQia~ ... 'tT)v to~autTIv qu,:ElQ(av)."" But perhaps the IOCILJ ciaJsiau for this view of the value of his tory is a passage from the Art of Rirttorn of Dionysius of Halicarn assus: "And Plato says this too, that the poe tic, by beautifying the many deeds of the ancients, educates those who are born later. For educa tion ( nalC~£la ) is the conjoining of oneself ( lvt Eu1;l~) with character. And Thu cydides seems 10 sa y this, speaking about history (1CEQi. [otoQia~): that hislory is phi/oroph.J from examples (on xat {OtoQ(a cPtAooO$(a tm:lV tx naQO.bElYIl6.tWV) ."20
If history as a sp«ies of literature has its specifK cultural or practiC',d values, it also has its specific standards. In Polybius' words, "if truth (lv.:r18ua ) is ta ken away from history (t; totoQ(a~) what is left of it is a useless tale."ll In addition to this standard for the relationship between the account and its subject matter, there a re also precepts of art that concern choice of subject, arra ngement, style, and so fonh,'1'l matters that need not be discussed here. For the present purposes it is sufficient to observe that {atOQ(a has come to bc the name for a species of literature and a cultural phenomenon . Indeed the Epistle of Dionysius of Halicarnassus to Pompey, already mentioned , is largely a discussion of the art of history writing. And treatises "On History " (J'tEQl {m:oQ(a~), apparently a bout history writing, are attributed to Theophrastus and to Praxiphanes." The modal distinction between history as the fa cts and history as literature is also found in the occurrences of lmoQELv in Hellenistic writings. It is still used occasionall y in its original sense of inquiring for the facts about persons, things, or events. Polybius, concluding a n account of the " tragic" accounts of Hannibal's crossing of the Alps, says that he can report confidently about these Ihings " because of having inquired (ImoQTIxEvm) about the events from those who were " Plb. 5.15.5-6; see " Iso 1.1.1- 2,35.9- 10, ;,and 2.35.5-6. • D . H. RA. 11.2; sec also Plb. 2.6 1.3-6. 7. Plb. 1.14.5-6: see " Iso 3.20.5. n C hoice subjec:l: D. H . PWI/I . 3, 4, 6. Arr"ngemenl: Plb. 3.57.4- 5, 58. 1, 118.12. Conclusions: D . H . Pomp. 3. ., For Theophr,utus. sec D. l. 5.47. The claim of G. A ~arius (L ...."" ScJrri{t wr GrWtiI:htudtrilnm,d IhiIl Thc:oplu,lS!us' work cannot h,,~ ~n "bout hiMOf)' writin g is reje
or
42
Idta of History
there and having inspected the terrain" a nd having made the crossing himself.?' The verb is also occasionally used in the close ly rdated sense of learning or knowing by inqui ry. or, as we might ca ll it, " historical knowledge." Thus Philodemus sap that those who a re ignorant of the proper medi ci ne for curing a disease are conq uered " by their own lack of expert historical knowledge (unO t Ow fouot Wv . . . [m:oQ1'Jx6twv). "7$ Litera lly lranslatt'd. Im oQ"x6 twv means " things th at have been learned by inquiry:' Although the verb is somr limes used in these rela tively older ways , in its mos t common usage it mea ns to " repon " or 10 "rela te" some facts about persons, things , or events. Thus Dionysius of Halicarnass us und erta kes to pro\'(' tha t Demosthenes p ubli shed twel ve s p~ch es bc: fo~ Aristotle began wri lin ~ his R htlOri(, usi ng ev id~nce " from things tha t hav(' been reported (tx 'twv l OYOQOUfAEVWV) .""lI; And Theophrastus says, "This was an abridged version of things rela ted (n iIV (mOQ11J1.£vwv) about firs t princi ples, written down not according to time, b ut accord ing to simil arity of opinion."1; Al so, both Allt igonus of CaryslUs, the thi rd-century para d oxograp h ~ r , and Polrbius use: the verb in this way freq uently.tlI Finally, a word about thr adjectiv(' (otoQ l x6~ in the Hellenis tic Age. It is used pri marily in the su bstan tivl' way fou nd earlier in Aristotle; it means " historia n," on(' who engages in LotoQi o. Dionys ius of Halica rnassus, fo r example, discusses the " task of a historian (lQYov [otOQ1XOU) ,"19 And there is also Ih(' word (otOQ 1 OYQ~, " historical writer," to indicate the historian in hi s more d istinctly litera ry aspecl.)O In fact, this aspect who lly domina tes the uses of the adjective in thi s period , Ujonysius has a pet ph rasl', Tj l mO(Ux"; n payj.lo l d a , in which the att ribu tive usage de ri ves from th e subs tant ive, so that the phrase ind icates " the his torica l busi ness" or "craft ,"JI And this craft is litera ry , not scientific or philosoph ic. Pl b. 3.48. 12; Kt also 1.63.7: 2.17 .2: 3.38.2- 3: 9. 19.3- 4; and Phld . Rh. 1..14, 16-21. 1\ Phld. RA. 1. 345. 1- 8; Itt" al$O 2.105 (t·, . 12). 51f".. and Mh. 2.62.6 and 3.6 1.2- 3. :M D. H . .1",,,,. 1.4; Kt al!oO .1 ..1. Rom. 5. 17.4, 56. 1, t"1 ("". n T hphr. PhJliul Op illiolll, Fr. 8 (Dit"l5, DG 484. 17- 18). T his pauagt suggtSiS thal al lu .st ror Ihe Ptr i pall~li c:s, a .. ltistory ~ did nOI rr-quirt" chrnnological arrangt"mr-nL • Anlig. pp. 6. 27, 80, 169, 179-80, 192 , 194. 191 , t 99. 202, 205, 207. Plb. 1.37 .3: 2.16.13- 14,11.2; 4.8.4, 41.2; 6.49.2. 54 .6. " D. H . PfHllp . 3. 13; also Phld . Rh. 1.28, 301-:/9. 101. 1.200. 18- 30 a nd Ca«il. 124.3 . .. Plb. 2.62.2; 8.11 .2; Antig. p. 180. II D. H . Pom.p. 3.8; A",,,, . 2.2: Tit. 2 and 24. :H
Hutory as a Literary Genre
43
Perhaps the basic feature of Roman cuhure is the pervasive and sustained influence of the Greek culture. Andronicus, the first Latin poet, was Greek; he made a translation of the OdySJty that remained a school text well into the Augustan Age, and he also translated eerlain Greek tragedies into Latin meters. Likewise his successor, Naevius, produced plays of Greek origin in Latin meters, while Ennius , the lhird of the early poets, wrote his Antulies of Rome in the characteristically Greek hexameters also used later by Lucretius and Vergi!. The comic poets of this period, Plautus, Caecilius, and Ten:nce, all produced translations of the Greek New Comedy of Philemon, DiphiIus, and Menander; and the earliest historians of Rome-Quintus Fabius Pictor, Lucius Cincius Ali mentus, and Postumius Albinus -all wrote in Greek. Scholarship in both Greek and Latin literature was begun at Rome at the instance of Crates of Mallos, the Creek Stoic grammarian from Pergamum, who, detained at Rome in 159 H.C. with a broken leg, awakened the admiration of many Romans for the sophistication of Gr~k study. And what interes t there was in philosophy at Rome was inspired hy the embassy from Athens in 155 R.e ., consisting of COlalaus the Peripatetic, Diogenes the Stoic, and Cameades the Academic, whose auditors may have included the earliest of the "Scipionic Circle," which included C . Laelius, who appears in several of Cieero's dialogues, Lucihus the satirist, Terence the comic poet, Polybius, and the Stoic Panaetius, who was the first to attempt philosophy at Rome. In sum, the Romans borrowed thcir intellectual culture whole cloth from the Greeks; not only the forms but also the models and styles of those forms as well as the conceptual terminology. Indeed we owe mostly to Cieero the translatjon (and, not infrequently, the mistranslation) of the technical vocabulary of philosophy. which through the Middle Ages and especially through Scholasticism, passed into modem philosophy and which still lies at the heart of our discussions of sensation, perception and cognition, action. passion, and evaluation. More often. however, the Romans borrowed by simple transliteration; as, ror example, pkilosoplzia. In the same way they borrowed by transliteration the words lzislon'Q and Izuloricusj but they did not borrow either the ancient word [O'tWQ or the verb lO'toQ£~v . 12 '" A mcdicVilI ..... tin \~rb. A.Utonar..., is allall!!d; J.ee Du Callge. Glrwariu", MnJiM tllrtji_ u.tmitaru (Paris. 188~7 14 : 2:1O.
44
Idta oJ History
This is of considerable importance. For. as has been seen , lOToQia derived originally from {O'tOQElV and had the meanings ( 1) an inquiring
or inquiry and (2) the resuhs ofinquiry either all the facts or information so obtained o r a factual account, or as the written account pcr se. Now what these various meanings have in common is inquiry of a certain kind . Even in the Helle nistic remains . which show a dominance of history as a species of litera lure, ther<' is still the recognition , at least implicitly, thallhe content crlhis sort orliu'ralure is related as product to a particular kind of intellectual activity, inqu iring. In sofar as o n(' explicates a basic meaning of Izisloria-niltoricus it will nOl ha\'e this (Ore of original active meaning becau!'i(' ther(' was not such a Latin verb. Uses of historia and ltiJforirus in Latin writings of republ ican limes arc infrequent. The only exception is C icero, who uses hisfor;a a greal deal relalive 10 what is fo und in the scant y r('mains of Ih(' works of other writ ers. Both for this reason and because of the magnitudr of his influen ce upon subseque nt \Ves t('rn thought,,11 it seems worthwhile to consider Cicero's usage separatel y after examining those ofother republican writers. The earliest occurrences of hiJtaria arc in the comedies of Plaulus. In the Trinummw (381 ), Lysiteles begs the permission of his father. Philto, to wed an undowered wife. Phiho replies that he could argue agains t it , for "' this myoid age holds old and ancien I history." Similarly in the Bacchidts ( I~ ), Lydus, the tutor of Pi swclcs. objects that if th(' young man takes a mis tress as he wishes. then he. Lydus. like Phoenix . the lutor of Achilles, will haH' to bear sad tidings 10 his fath e r. PistocJes replies, " Satis historiarums t! That 's e nough of his tories!" The history in both oflhese passages seems 10 bt- an account ofi mporlant events in the lives of persons . Philto evidemly knows what happe ned 10 olhers who did whal l.ys itele5 proposes; and thC'" latter passage' alludes 10 the Story of Phoenix 's sad mission to Pf"ieus. Wt' art' reminded of the regular signification uf lo-ropEiv ill Alli(· drama .. s inquiring: fe)1' the facts abolll a person's life . If his/aria has this rathe r antique meaning in refere nce to personal events, the re is another occurrence in Plautus re miniscen t of a different n " or a rbu mi or C iccro's in nu cnce, sce Richard McKf'On. " Introduction tu Ihe Philosophy ofCicero,Mpp. \ - 9 of Ihfo Cllirlll E"if;~ o/Cim. (C hicago, 19501. ~t/)fe diffuse is John C . Rolre. Ciu", 1111" /lis J~j1"OIrr (Ne ..· York, 1963); and for a n intrrell+ ing application, $~ Slcphen Bottin, ~Cictro as a RoIr Modtl for £arl~· Atnl'fica n Lawyers: A Case Stud \' in CllIMicallnnucnct: q 7~ ( 1 ~177_;R) : :\1 ~2 1.
History as a Literary Genre
45
Greek usage. Menaechmus Sosicles, with his servant Messenio, has been looking for his twin brother all over the Mediterranean for six years without success. Messenio complains that they have wandered among Istrians, Spaniards, Musilians, lUyrians, all around the Adriatic, up the whole coast of Italy and into Greater Greece: "You're hunting for a knot in a bulrush. Why don't we go back home-that is, unle!s we're going to write a hislory?")4 What is suggested by the use of his/aria here is an account of firsthand observations of geography, peoples, and customs, which is very like the older usage of tmoQ(a to indicate the fa cts or a factual account about natural things . There are, however, only these few attestations of nil/aria in older, more Hellenic ways. More frequently, nis/aria and nis/anew have to do not with things or persons, but with social and political events. The biographer Cornelius Nepos relates .that Cato "was already an old man when he began to write a his/aria of which he left seven books. The first contains the accomplishments of the kings of the Roman people; the second and third the origin of all the stales of Italy-and it seems to be for that reason that he called the entire work The Origi11I."n Nepos evidently understands histaria in a broad sense here as includ ing political events, the actions of kings, and the origins of cities; but the histaria, whatever its subject, is a written account. HiJtoria as a written account of events is distinguished from annals in the famous fragmenls of the historian Sempronius Asellio (ca. 140-90) preserved by Aulus Gellius.36 The first fragment distinguishes annale5, which state only what happened year by year, from "writing of the things done by the Romans, ru gestae a Romanis puseribere," which shows "the purpose and the reason for which a thing was done, qUI) consilio quaqUt rationt gerta tsstnl. " 37 The second fragment says: "To write, however, by which consul a war was begun and by which completed and who came into the city from it in a triumph, and not to state in that book what was done in the war or what the senate decre«l meanwhile or what law or bill was carried, not to go into the motives for which these things were done: that is to tell stories to children , not to write history, id fabu las PlUriS t51 narraTe, non ,. M.". 247-48. 1:1 Nep. CaU) 3.3; see also All. 16.3. -Gell. Nil. ~.18.8-9. " Fr. 1 in H. Peter, HiJU)ricanun R_MnufI
F1I~lmnlla
(Leipzig, 1883 ).
46
Idea of Histo~.,
hislorias scrilxr~."'" If Aselliu distinguishes lJiM(I17(j from (/1111(1/,.\ hy its inclusion of the motives of the a t:luI"S, Nepos d i~ inguis h es IIi.f/olia from biography (vitam .. . narrart) as being concerned with public a nd private deeds (us) respec li \'dy .~ It would be imprudent 10 ~ u p· pose tha t these di stinctions rr ilcoct disti nctions ordin ari ly made among accoun rs of pas t t""t;nts or among na rra ti ve genera . But the fact that Ihest' writers d raw tht: distincti on ind icatf's Iha l his/oria was the name lor an ord inari ly r("(:ugnizcd s pecies of literatu re. So it is tha t Nepos descri bes Thucyd idcs as om' of tht>wri ters who h3\'(' If'rt a history, his/oriam rtliquerunt.'" And similarly Nrpos uses the adjecti\'e hi.storicus, like lO'tOQIX6<; in Grn'k. suhs tan ti\Tly to inriica lr a writer of his tory, a histori an, say i n~ that Akibi adf's has h('t!1I praised by th rce very suious his torians, Irn grtll·jHimi his/oriri. " Histon'cfls i:r; used in a sli,!!;htly d iO"crl' nt way in a passag!: from Va rro's treatisc On Rural Th in.t{s: ''' Well ,' sa id I. ' I sha ll spea k abou t what is historica l (quod ts{ his/on·con ). a bout til r two thi ngs which 1 ment ioned firs t, thr origin a nd the digni ty . Concerning thc t hird part. \\'here il is a malleI' CIf art. Sc:Tof"" wi ll t;lkt' il up: " I;.' T ht' subjec:t of the histnrical here has 1M;'t'1l rt:ft'ITt"t1 tn heli Jl"t" Ihe migi ns. Yel it is nol in rcla tionship 10 wriUf' n accnun ts ca lkd history thal someth ing is called " histori{'a l": bu t ralll(·r. in relation 10 thl' compl ete knowledge of the su bject und r r discussio n. whi ch in t his passage is understood to includr " pa rt cnn{'t"rnt"d wi th " history " and a pan concerned with "a rt " I)r scil'nce. Tilt' two parts of knowledge here seem to be knowing a hu ut somcthi ng a nd knowing how to do it: and thc " his torical" know ing is knowin.e; about w mt'l hing , Similarly, the u se of his/ono in Pla utus' Trinummus, alrrad y considerr d in terms of its subject , a persona l fx."l' Urrl'tl("r , indi call's more the knowledge possessed than tht' account ur it. Ahlwugh [ht'Tr a rf' not rnough a ttested uses upon which to hasC' a c.;onlid fn t itss('rtion_ W f' srem (() find in lhese early Repuhlica n materials hOl h " diSl im·tion a mong the subjects of history and a moda l rlistin('tioll bet ..... el'n the account of what one knows abou t t hes(' things ami thl' kno\\'iedgf itself: C icero's uses of hisforia and hisfori(flJ. whill' mon ' frc' qU t- lll , are substantially the same as thost· nf his contt"m pora ries , Ht" someli mt"s ust"s • Fr. 2 (I'eter) . .., N~p . PtlllfJ. 1.1. ... Ntp. 1"1Irm. 9.1: also I.ucil. 6 11.
"Ntp. Air. 11.1 . " Varro RWJI . 2. J .2.
History as
12
Liltrary Genre
47
Aistaria as a factual account; the subject of it may be a personal occurrence,o or natural phenomena. u More often, however, his uses of Aistaria have to do with social and political events . He points out, for example, that his side of Ihe argument against the Epicureans Or! E"tJs4~ can cite numerous examples of noble action from the past, while " in your discourses history is silent (historia mu/a est) . In the school of Epicurus I have never heard mention of Lycurgus, Solon, etc." Similarly, he considers the preservation of certain laudatory speeches of the great orators by the families who commissioned them a mixed blessing; for they include many things that never happened, and in this way "Ihe history of our affairs (his/aria rerum ,.ostrarum ) has been made more faulty. "t6 In all of Cicero's uses so far examined, h.is/aria is understood as the facts or information about the particular subject, and it might be translated as " the facts" or "account of the facts." But in just this respect, all of these differ from what is by far the largest group of Cicero's uses of hisloria, in which it refers 10 a written account about social and political events. Such an account may be referred to specifi cally as a written work. "But a his/ona," he says, "cannot be completed unless a period of leisure has been arranged, nor ca n it be completed in a short time."" And in the same way he mentions the various his/anat written in Greek and Latin." He reports what " the histories say, histontU loqu(Jr!tu," about Publius Africanus, and he worries about "what the histories might be saying about us, quid lItro hislariae dt nobis . .. pratdican,./."t9 Although we have no historical composition as such from his pen, we know that Auicus urged him to write history5oG and that he was taken with the suggestion ; for he asks Atticus to send him certain dates and details about the consulship of C. Fannius, saying. "I am Cic. All. 1.16.18. "Cic. N" . D. 1.!1.88; Sa': also Fitt. 1.7.25; 2.33. 107; and T~,". 1.45.108 . ., Cic. Filt. 2.21 .67: also 5.2.5; and Dill. 1.19.38 and 24.50. "Cic. Brv. t6.62; also Rtp. 2.18.33. for a philosophical inu:rpre!ation or C icero's view Qfhulory in Rtp., S~ Ronald Halbaway, ~Cicero's Socratic View or History," JHI29 ( 1968): 3- 12. " Cic. u~ . 1.3.9 . .. E.g., Bftt. 83.283; N.t. D. 2.21 .69; Off. 3.32. 11 5; Dill. 1.24.49; AIt. 1.19.10, 12.3.1; QF,. 1.1.10; F_ . 5. 12.2. "Cic. Ac. 2.2.5; also DiD. 2.32.69; A ll. 2.5. 1 and 2.20. 1. ,. Cic. All. t4.14.S. 11
48
Uta oJ History
enflamed with zeal for history. Art/to studio Izjsto ri(1t:'.~l Again , Anlonius in the dialogue 0" Orotory11 d efends the subordination of history to oratory: "And as history, hislono is the witness of Ihe times, t he light of truth , the life of memory, the tutor of life, lhe messenger of antiquity, by what olher voice than the orator's can she be commended la immortality?" Where "islaria in the first group of uses meant a written work abou t
political events, in this second group
il
seems
10
indica te a branch of
litera ture or lit erary culture. the species of ..... hich the " histories" in lhe first group arc indi vid uals. This is perfec tl y dear in the Bru/us when he discusses the !tistoria of Licius Siscnna , obsen 'ing Ihal "this type of writing, genus lux scriplionum" has yet to be cultivated in Latin litera t urt'.11 In another cluster of occurrt:nces, historia is d efi ned or distinguished from other species of literature. In his youthful Dt invtntione,)4 historia is d efined as a nt: of the subspecies of the genus " narrative" ; for narra tive " is divided into two parts: one is conce rncd with events (ntgo/iu), tht' other mainl y with pt'rsons. That which con.sists of an exposition of event s has three parts: fabula, hiItoria, and argumtnlum. Fabula is the term applied to a narrative in whi ch the events are not true a nd have no likeness to truth .. . . Historia is an account of things done, remote from the- me-mory of our own age , hisloria ut gtsfa rts ab attatis nos/rat rtmola . . .. Argumtntum is a fi ctitious narra tive which nevertheless cou ld have occurred ." O n th(' o ther hand, in Tht Oralor\~ Cicero attributes 10 the Greeks the view that his/orias, along with eulogies, descriptions, and ex horta tions, com prise the class of epideinic speech . Likewise. in his discussion of the idt'a l orator, Cicero has occasion to distinguish historin from the o ratorical styll' of thl' Sophists. For " history is nearly rela ted to this class, hui{ gtntri llistoriajinitima tsf' in that it 100 na rrates, describes countries and batt les. and includes speeches; hut they d ifft'f in tha t history seeks a smooth . flowing s tyle, unlike tht' tersl'. vigorous styll' of an oration ..;o· However, Antonius, in the dialogue On Orato~)'.\) reported ly gives a Cic. All. 16.1 3.c.2; also All. 2.11.1.16. If Cic. D, 0,. 2.9.36. I) Cic 81"11. 64.228; ab(l U t . 1.2.5- 7. ... Cic. /"D . 1.19.27. » Cic. Oral. 11 .37. "Cic. Oral. 20.66; also 12.39; B". . 75.'2fi2 and 83.286. J> Cic. D. 0 •. 2. 15.62-64. ~I
HiJtory as a Liurary Gmre
49
short account of the devdopmem of histo,ia from a collection of annals (annalium confictio) as part of his argument that history, like the other branches of literature , receives no special stylistic rules from oratory, since the rules of hislOry are common knowledge : For who does nOf know that history's first Jaw (primam .. . Iristoriae i~
that one dare not say what is false? Next that he must say only what is true? That there be no suggestion uf favor in his writing? Nor of malice? These foundations, that is, are known to all; the finished work, however, rests on the things and the words ("htu tllH,his) . The order of things (mum 1alio) requires lemporal arrangement and grographical description; .. . Ihe plans of campaign , Ihe uecutive actions and results, also what Ihe wriler holds 10 be important, and tha! it be declared among the Ihings done nOI only what was done and said, but also in what manner; and while speaking of consequencC1, that all the causes be explained, ei ther accident, or wisdom, or foolhardiness, and of the people themsdves not only the things done (res gulal), but abo the life and character of those who excel in renown and in dignity. However, the order of words and the type of speech (tJoerlx1rum ratio lt l"'us orationis) to be sought are the easy and nowing. l,gnn)
In De legibus he also invokes truth as the criterion af history where he di stinguishes the laws to be followed in history from those to be fol lowed in poetry, even though Herodotus and Theopompus include numerous stories (jabulae ).'JI And in Definib~ he opposes lziJloria to fabula, saying that examples of noble conduct " have been recorded nat in falsefahula only, hut also in historia." Cicero also occasionally uses the adjective historicu.s, and usually in ways that reRect his uses of Izistoria. On the one hand , he remarks that Demochares wrote a history of Athens " not so much in the historical as in the oratorical manner, non tam lziJlorica quam o,atorio genefe."«I Here historiws suggests "in thc style proper to a historical corn· position ." Then again he observes that public opinion is naive not only about politicians, "but also about orators, philosophers, poetS, and historians , lzistoricos,"61 using the adjective substantively, as it had been used in Greek . There is, however, another occurrence of the "Cic. Leg.
I.t.~; ~ts()
,. Cic.
5.22.64 .
Fi~ .
.. Cic. B ... 83.286. Cic. Tap. 20.78.
II
F.", .
~ . 1 2.3.
50
Idta
of Hutory
word in this sense that is somewhat odd. In D~ natura Dtorum he says: "There are also s~vuaJ Vu lean!!; the fifU , the son of the sky, was reputed the father by Minenr.t of the Apollo said b~' the ancient historians (antiqui his/miri) 10 be the tutelary d('il~' of Alhens:~;~ 11 is. unfortunately, not dear 10 whom he is referring in this passage; whether to someone who collected the \'arious accounts of the lineages of the gods and attempted 10 rationalize Ihem , which would have been [cnoQ(a of an ancien! Iype. or to some hi storian who, as Cicero says of Timaeu5,6) include vario us supposed acts of the gods amid thdr properly hismriul accounts ..-\5 has alreadr bet'n secn, Cicero does not seem to accept s uch matters as proper 10 historio. For both the Greeks and thc' Romans, history has comt" to be
understood. primarily as a species of literature. aiming to give an ac· curate and well-wriuen account of social and political ev('nu . When hislarin is defined or discussed, it is in trea lises of rhetoric o r gram· mar, never in philosophica l works; il is the art ur hislOry writing that is under discussion in thest" places, ncwr any such thing as " the na· ture and meaning of history .""\ Both (crtoQ(u and hisloria have, as a secondary meanin~ . "the facts" or " accurate information ." in which senst: history is a kind of knowledge: namely, the facts . This kind of knowledgf' was evidently nOt problemati c for them . In somt" contexts this sense of history is nearly akin to what we mean by "scientific" pursuits; but " history of nature" (l't£Qi CPUOE~ l(JtOQCU. hislaria nal/m,/is) was descriptiv(', re· lating the facts aboul natural phenomf'na, nol explanatory . Indecd it was for precisely this reason that Plato's Socrates gave it up, and not only C icero but also other Latin writers uppose hislaria to rnlio.61 Everyone seemed to know what it was to have or to recount history " Cic. Nlli. D. 3.22.~~ . n Cic. Nil/. D. 2 .27.69 . loO On history as a I~c ies of lit~raturt and its inclusion ill rllI:,orit, It I' illl" 1I1ill E. R. Jkvan, " Rtw:toric in thl' Ancitnt World," in F.JJfl.1J iN /lOIfDlIf of Gillu" MUHII)" ed. H . A. L , Fisher (London. 1936). pp. 189-213: t'. H . Colson, "Somt Consideralions 15 to tht InnucnCt: of Rhetorit on Historv:' /'roe. ~ ,,.,, Cl. AUN. 14 ( 19 17) : 149-73, M. I.. Clarkl', Rk,ori(., R.., (l.oIldon, 1966), pp. ~7-58 , 76-77,96, 122-23: and, on Cicl'ro in parlicular. B. L. Haltward, "Citl'ro H istoricus. ~ CII",6,. /lisi. flvnt41 3 (1931 ) : 221-37. Pau l Scheller's Dt H,llnlisl;clI H iJloritll COlUcri6,flUI A". (Leipzig, 1911 ) concludes that .he art of histo ry dC'Vdopcd ..... ithin thfO rh eloricaltradition. I~ . J . R05ot: ObSl'Nt! lA Hmttl.".t of uriN UhT.tUft. 3rd M. eN!" .... York : 1::, P. DU\tOIl , 1966), p. Ill) thilt in .hl' age that rollowed hocrMI'! • •he historian was " a rhetorician in the first place, a researchl't in th~ sccond onl y.~ ~ E.g., Varro U"I' 8.2.6: Cir. NOI. D. 1. 31.88: and Fifl. 1.1.23.
History as a Literary Genre
51
in this sense. In fact, one problem with rendering the term by our word "facts" is that for us the notion of facts might require explication; for the ancients historjQ did not. The questions that they felt comptlled to ask and answer about " history" were questions ofart.6Ii It is only in its primary mea nings as a spccies of literature that history is a branch of intellectual culture; it is not a science. In its secondary meaning as "accurate information" it might indicate a kind of knowledge; but this is not taken to be a branch of intellec tual culture as it has been since the Renaissance.£» History in this latter sense is not a subject of discourse; one might relate the facts , but not discuss them. History is not a subj ect for philosophical inquiry; one is either acquainted with the facts or onc is not. In neith er of the modes of its usage, then, did history raise scien tific or metaphysical questions of the sort that so exercise modern philosophers and historiographers. On the other hand, the subjects for history seem to have remained the same for quite a long time; history has to do with persons, things, or events. It does not have to do with the origin and descent of the gods, the origin of mankind or of the world, or the acts of the gods a mong mortals . Ciccro was slightly scandalized by the fact that the Hellenistic historian Timaeus had incl uded certain accounts of the wishes of the gods in his work .r.II History and poetry are different genres; in the latter it is perfectly proper and customary to dea l with mythological subjects, but in the former it is improper and grounds for criti cism. The employmen t of [O'tOQELV, {OtOQ(a, historia, and so forth implies that the thing being talked about is matter of public and observable fact; the accounts of the gods are not. It is against this backdrop of regular usage in Greek and Latin tha t one must exa mine the usage of these words by Jews and C hristians in the ancient world . In this way one may compare the Graeco·Roman with the Judaeo--C hTistian idea of history. Of the many national groups who inha bited Alexander's cosmopolis not the least was the J ews, who, accord ing to Philo,"" numbered "' U lrich '0'00 Wilamowill-MOC"lkndorlT hu n<)lro (GruJ; HUlorko/ Wrili~~ , Iran$. Gillxrl Murray (Ollforo: Clarendon Press, 19(8), npe<:ially pp. 21- 261 Ihat the Greek., had on ty an art, but nOl a science or hislOry. .. E.g., Benoil LaCroill. L 'Hisltlirt t/oru 1i4~lif/lliti (Mon treal, 195 1). p . 2 1t : "The ernancipalion of hi"ory as an aluonomou, discipline is a relatively modern facl ." tit Cic. Nol. D. 2.27.69 . ., Philo I" Fillet . 43.
52
Idta of Hislory
on~
million in hi~ lime and comprised the predominant population in two of the five sectors of Alexandria . As with the Romans, so for the Jews in Egypt: prolonged contact with Greek civi lization exercised a great influence on their social and intellectual life. It remains a disputed question to what extent Alexandrian J ew~ were educated in the Greek manner. in the g)'1Jlnasia and tphebia . 1O As a matter of course they learned to speak Greek-en'n to th(" extent that the knowledge of Hebrew bt'came rar('~ . Indeed it seems to have lx=en for fear that this situation would result in the rnlriclion of knowledge of the Scriptures to a small elite that there came into being a Greek vusion of the Old Testament. which acquired the name Sepluagint through the apocryphal account of its o rigins in the Lttter to Arisleas. The translation was used in synagogues increasingly until a reaction set in after the destru clion of Ih(' Jeru sa lem tempk in A .U . 70. This translation , which seems to he tht' resuh of a movement las ting several centuries rather than a single pruj€'ct. is both the first and the greatest document of J ewish Hellenistic literature . Besides the Septuagint, Ih€' influence of Greek literary cuhurt' is evidenced by other works uf Jews writing in Creek and in Crt"ck literary forms . Eusebius has saved for us some vers(' from a traged)" called Exodus (J:.xagoge) by tht' st'cond -cen tury writer Ezechiel as well a~ some hexameters of J ewish histurical epics hy Philo the Elder and Theodotus. Eusebius also saved mos t of th(' surviving fragments of Demetrius, who wrote On tilt KingJ in JuritUQ based on the ScplUagint . Of more hi storical writers, tht" first -n'ntury compiler Alexander Pol yhiSlor t:xcerpted passages from works by Artapanus and by Cleodemus (callt:d Malchus), ('ach of whom atl('mpted 10 demonstrate the superiority of the Jews to the Greeks bOlh in age and in greatness of achievements. In addition, Second Maccabt:es. like Philo' s EmbQjs..~ to Ga;us and Josephus' Jewish Wars. shows a strong slylis ti c influence of Thucydides and Polybius. Of more philosophica l wrilings, Ihe Wisdom of Ben Sira, known as Ecclesiasticus, uses Pia IoniC" and Stoic technical terms and, like III
Harry Austryn Wolfson IP.IIil, (Cambridgt: Han'ard U nivrnity
Pr~S5.
1947),
I : 781f.) denies txtensive cultural (including educational) inter~no: tratKm . Howtvl'!r,
L. H. fddman (EM.JC1optdia jll.daic,. ;m ide 00 " Hellenism poinll OUI that there was no 'pc'cial Jewish educational system in Egypt and that what thert was taught tht lOur Gretk caminal vi rtu~ . Pa rt of the dispute invoh'ts contraT')Ointerpretations of the decree of the empuor Claudius diKouraginJl Jews from srnding their childrrn to the "",lIlui a and tplitM" . H
)
History as a Literary Gmrt
53
Fourth Maccatxe::s, is re::minisce::n l of Cynic and Stoic diatritxs.lI The:: sccond-century writer Aristobulus preseOls a morc philosophical version of the theory of J ewish superiority to the Grttks. He evide ntly hdd that the:: He::bre::w Scriptures were avai lable:: in a Greek version long before:: the Septuagint, and argued from this that Pythagoras, Socrates, and Plato, acquainted with this version, derived the basis of their own philosophies from it. a vie::w customarily attributed to Philo. For prese::nt purpose::s, the most important representative of J ewish Hellenistic thought is Philo of Alexandria (ca. 20 B.c.-ca. A.I). 40). Schooled in the Old T estamen t and in the Hellenistic literary culture of which Alexandria was the eenter, Philo undertook to reconci le Judaism with Greek (particularly Platoni c) philosophy. His works are the first in which may be observed the ferment of modes of thought cha racteristic of the Gracco-Roman world and those charac:leristic of the Judaeo-Christian, not so much because of the particulars of any philosophica l or theological project in which he was engaged, but j ust because he is trying to write about things J ewish in a language in which those things had not previously been much d iscussed. He is constrained . therefore, to a pply Greek words to ne::w things; in particular, the c:onstellation of Greek intell«.tual terms must be:: so applied . This shift to a new set of objects is evide.1t as soon as ont conside::rs Philo's use of the passive voice of the verb lcn:OQElV. He concl udes his account of the origin of {he Passover Feast saying, " these things are recorde::d ({ cn:OQei:'tQ~ ) according to the ancient account of the origin ."17 Again, he:: states that the pries ts of (he Hebrews were in11 Cynic influence has also been dcmoMt ratro in first-century Jewish thoug hl by tnlcing the translOrmation ora (" ,i~ (rom Xenophon into a first-century vcrsion about Hillel; Henry A. Fisc:hel, "Studies in Cynicism and the Ancicnt Near Eut: The Transronnalion oh C1r.ri~ , " in Rtli,itMI ilt Alltil/lli!,r. £UQ.J1 ill Mnnllry IIf ErwUt &mukll ~. , ed.J acob Neus ner (Lciden: Brill, 1968), pp. 372-4 11 . On the diatribe, sce the a rticlc " Diatribe" by W. Capelle and H.-I . Marrou, ReQl/uib" fl, AAli.l:t lI"ti C'rislnllllllt 3 :990- 1009. Na tura lly Jewish borrowings bttamc early Christian borrowings; and Rudolr Buhmann showro [De, Stil tie. /'lltI./ini~1un Puti'gl ..1Ii tiie .l:Jflisc1tJ'~jC't Dialri~ (GOuingen: Vandcnhock and Rup~ht , 1910)- FoTJtbngtll l ll, Rtliljlllt 111Ii Likrlltll, titS Altnr. IIU NtIUtI T'JI_trlls , 13J the ClIlem to which Paufs style coincides with that or lhc Cynic and Stoic popular philosophers. And elemcnls of dialribc have been acen in the Epislle of SI. James U. H. Ropes, A Critical tmd I:.it.gtmal Cf1trImnlillry l1li tAr Epi/llt Pi SI . }GtIIt.S (Edinburgh, 1916; 196 1), pp. 10- 18J and in H ippolytus' C""',a NIIt/Vfll (Robert J. Bu tterwo rth , Hif!/H>lyt.J : CII" " II NOtlllm. (London, 1977), pp.118- 14 i] . n Philo SfH'. Lt,. 2.146.
54
/dID DJ Historv
s tall ed " in a way wry new aucl wOrlh being re'co rd ~d (o.SlOV lato-
QT)6l'1vm)."1I Hr uses Ih(" same phrase in anolhrT plac~ , s aying ' . ·' Th~ mann~r of his [i.t'.. Noah'sJ prcs('n'alioll . as the sacred books contain iI, is " 'orlh heing rt'c()rdf'd hoth :.t ~ a mar\'cl and for Ih(' improvement of charaClcr, " 71 The \'nh is thus lI s t,cI only ill tht' passh'c. whkh . as alrtady nOled . is typically Hrllrnislic ilnd thl' ml'alling suggested . also typically 'i ('lI('nistic. is " ht'in~ n'nmlcd " ra lhrT than lil(" u ldfl' sense of " iuquin· ... TIll' U Sil,I (t' is .~ landard . hut the ohjects in\'()iwd art' cenainly 1I0t ; Ilx 1111' inl(lrmaliufI n '('o rdrd has to d o with ,he o rigin of I h(' Passo\'('r FCllst. tlu- installa lion tlf , he .J l'wis h prit's ts. and tht t scap{' fir ~I)ah from till' Iwlly flI" Ihr wha\r , Thr firsl IWO, conc.:erned wi ll! Ihe rilt,s IwrlclI'lTlrd hy :l errt"iu proplt' , easily ('o m· pare with history undt>I'Stoud as t' lhno,' traphil'al informatio n ; and the acco unt of Noah '~ ('s('a l)(' is nIT likr histnTY IIndl'r~IfHKt as an ('mo· tionally chargt""d "\'t' nl in 0\ p,' rson's lifr , This same ness and dim'n'lH'\' "Iso ;tppt'ars in Philo's uses of lOlopla a s fat'ls ur informaliotl. Tht'rt' is 11 fir s I Kroup tlf liSt'S c:onct' TIl ing nalural phenome na , In a ,'tt' lwrai ~t' II St' Ill' ~ay.s Iha l nflhusf" ....·hn !i!;0 abroad for 101l!i!; p('rind s Ill' liml' "smn(' acquiT(' lmoQCav or what they did not know pr('viously,"- ' Mort, s pel'ifil'ally, ht, points out that his in q uiry into Ih(' rcaSlJII why l\ l os('s sp"ak!! uf Ih(' "li ps" of a ri\'('r " is nol about Ihe hi~l(Jr y or rin'rs (1lEpi Jlt)tu~,uov iOToQ(a~ )": ;'; and he memio ns Ih(' {(JlOQia ahuut tht, Ski li an slrails and tht' imoQlav about the ~('OKraphy (If I)t'los and Rlul{lt's , ,. Thr last two passagrs an' liHlIld in Philu's statrm('nt and c.:ritidsm of four argume nts 'ilT tlu- cl't'alio l1 and futurf' ti{'Slruction of the world , Th(' fi-lUTlh argumt'111 ru11S as ,i./tows;
till' .mintOlls iu it wnuld h(' rH:rlas tin~ also. and most t'sprdally till' human ral'!, iml.~lIIurh a s il i! 5u p~ rior to tht' resl. Hut man ai!IC) i.~ 5,"' 11 to hr IIr latr tlri,l(in hy IIltIs!" who wish to Sl"areh into Iht' liu'u of nalurt', For it i ~ pruhablr or rathrr nrc"sa ~· that thl' ~xis t r n ('t' ..r tI)(' ans should t'(lim:icl,' with that of man , that they are in ract CtI!'\,al, Itut onh IIt't'a llsl' sySh'rn a nd nlr thod art' naw-
If tht' world was
TJ
t' \"\~ r l:t s liu~ ,
Philo I'. J/OJ. :.!.I .B.
" I bid, 1,59, " Philo AI" , (,.~ .
'" Philo So",~ , 2 3112 , " Philo :1/1 , ,1111f1d, t1f1 and
t :I ~I.
History as a Littrary Genre
55
ral to a rational animaJ , but also because it is impossible to live witkout them , disregarding the myths palmed ofT on the gods by tlu: playwrights .... But if man is not from everlasting, so ndther is any other living creature, therefore neither the regions which have given them a habitat, ea rth a nd water and air. This clearly shows that the world is destructible.
But Philo objects that the arts:
It
is fo lly to measure man by the standard of
And if indeed people must say that the a ru are coeval with the race of men, then they muu speak with natural histo,), (11£0' [atOQ'o.s: UOIXils:) , not unquestioningly and carelessly. And what is the history? (~6 ' {UlOQ{o.l'~ ; ). 18
What foll ows ( 146-49), that is, the "na tural history," is a very genera l account of the cyclic destruction of things on earth by fire and water, which seems to be largely derived from Plato's LaW! and TimatltS.79 In a ll of these cases, {moQla is concerned with natural phenomena and indicates the facts or information o r a fac tua l account about them , that is, a piece of knowledge of a certain kind , rather than the account in itself. a piece of literature of a certain kind . There is a second g roup of uses of {otOQ{a as lacts or information, which reminds us of Dionysi us Thrax because of the repeated mention of " history" as a part of grammar and hence of education . " Knowledge of the encycylical studies," he says, "adorns (he whole spiritual house; grammar on the one hand, searching into the poetic and investigating the [oroQ(av of ancient happenings."1O I have t.ranslated the genitive plurJi tyxUXMWlI, in the lil'st line of l his passage. "of the encyclical studies," as an ellipsis for i ·'Yx:ux).,ws -nO-WE(o. . This phrase. recurrent in ancient writings,' ! sugges ls the same sort of " I btd. 1 ~6. trans. Colson (Loeb). "Iu ColMXl notes in his A.ppendi,; to thi, pauage (LMb 9 : 530). Philo is simila.rly dependent upon these passages in the U W I ilnd Ti"'lIt11J ror his accou nts of terres trial disaJten at Ab,. I and Y. MOl. 2.53. and 2.263 . • Philo CMT. 105 . •• For a r"Ih=r di scussion of the ty,tintl.t~ l1uI6du a nd citation of lhe sources , see Hem-i Marrou, A H ug? of EJllUltio" i" A"tif""i!], tnlns. Gcorge Lilmb (London: She-ed and War·d . J956). pp. t76-7i . and 1-1. Fucks. ··[nkykl ius paifokia:· Rm llr.ci* PII [ fi r An,i*, and CllriJr,ntum 5::565-98. Philo (D, C:onKTI'llU qunf'TI'ndar Enuli/imlis KIn/in) u!'Cs the rather more complicated phrases Tl\v lWv ~owv XOt tyxux).1.wv tn:1tm"J1JWv .."tOT)V nUI6cicrv ( 14) and '" t"'(x\nU.lO/i JWOOUt1t (23) .
56 thing wc mean by "general education" as distinguished from specialized or professional education. It refers to a regular set of s ubjects, a "cycle o(studies," acquaintance with which was thought to constitu te the necessary foundation fOf any socially significant career.1I1 The cnC)'clica l sTudies mentioned in the present passagf' are, besides grammar (which seems
includt· put·try and " hislUry"), gt'omct ry, music, a nd rhetoric. However, ill his trealise on preliminary education. Philo has Wisdom ad\'js(' us to hold intefmurse with this cnc\'di cal edu cation because "I' the \'arious orrs pring that our association with each of these st udies will ocget. " Fur ( the study nf) Grammar will produce latOQiav. the thought brought lorth hy the poets and prose wrilers, a nd wealth of in formati 0 11 (noAu!-'a8drtv )." And h ~ also mentions the clfeets produc('d hy music. gcometry, rhetoric and d iall'ctic. I.ater in the same work he says Ihal his uwn assuc.:ia lion wilh gramm ar taug ht him " writing. reading and lotoQiav of tht, works of Iht" poets. " MI In all of th ese passages, history is considerrd a part or product orthe st ud y of grammar, as it was hy Dionysiu.'I Thrax, Wherr the gramma· rian's usagr len oprn thl' ra ngt" of subjects of history. Philo tends to limi t it to even ts. SI) also tht' (Om01el1l:Ho rs of thr work of Dionvsi us. But in ei ther case. hislOry indicatt's the: fa cts ur information rathcr than the account of them . it kind or knuwl('d,l1;t' rather than a kind of literature. Onc investigates ( ~ETabu1Jxou oa ) it .~ 1 or f{'c(,j"cs learning (aVaAi)wlv) ofjt . ~:' ra ther than writing or com posi ng it. Likcwist' , insofa r as it is trealrd in conj unct ion with pu(· try, as th(' IWO pa n s of grammar, it is a kind of knuwledgc rather tha n it species of literature, tu
.. Wernu Ja~Rer' s infl utn tial illlnpretati ol! ot'anfient ~ducational thought . Pllidt ;lI, should perhaps be supplemrnled hy MarTOu ( £dll(lIlioll jll Antiqll i~'I, especially P. 2. Cha.p. 11 :.Ind COIlc:t1,l~ ion , This f lll1"'dica.1 Mucation .... as takt o o"tr by tht Romans, who ga"t 10 tht s1,lhjf'cU Iht collrt!i\'c namt lilwr,,{u (II /, J, Tht " Ii brral arlS.- at first oinf' a nd later Sf'\'cn, alld di" id rd ;111 0 lh~ T rh';um and tht Quadri\';um. werr Ihe $ulmance of m«lit"al td ucation, St~ M , I.. W, ]'aiSIIlf'r. " Pagan Sc:hools and C hri stian Tcac ht~." in Lib,r F lon'tk.... lIilltll"lti~ iJrll' SIIIlJjt~. p, IAlm"~n ~ ..'" 65, G,6..,lsIIII 1'/L'ia,",I, «I, B, 8 i$chon' a nd S , 8n·l;httr. pp, -1 ' -61. Tht "b"lI/~ ,,,Its mar hll"~ fallen into some disrepute .1monR thr SdHlllUtin, hut 5IiJllo rm M Iht bas is for th ~ r~m:.lki rlg oI' the curri<'. ulum OfWf'SICrn civiliulioll llurin,l( the Kf'nais5a.nn~ , Sft I.. A~tSOll . T1it &,,"" Libnlll A"s (:'-Irw Yurk. 19(6): and , for a ~kt tch oftht. de\'clopmcnt of the ~u cr..&. ... Imlll ;mtic.luic.~' tu IlH Mlt-m it \ , ",'c' 11. J ~ IMI ", .. crlhf."' .~
'F...,"""".......
,,"wo; ..
( :\'I'''I<'l!1U1Il 117 ( I!lf,Cl ): ~~ ",,:\tt7 ,
' ., Ph ilo Co~,( ' , 15 and 7-1: .. Philo Clln. 105 . .. " hilo Somll , I.W5.
cl: SO,"II .
1.'lU5,
lIiJlOry as a Literary G'tnrt
57
Philo thinks of the encyclical education as a cycle of bodies of knowledge or sciences (bUcm1lJ.aq .1I6 For the most part, then , Philo uses [O"toQ£a to indicate facts or information: but there is one instance in which he seems to mean not the informa tion, but the account of it. Hearing is a wonderful thing, he says, since by its means we a re acq ua inted with music a nd with " the many kinds of speeches according to their delivery in cou rt trials, in deliberations, or in laud at ions, and even those in [(]toQialS and dialogues."' J The o bj ects of history in Philo's usage are not extraordinary for Hellenistic times, though they are different; but he differs markedly from the ot hers in emphasizing history as knowledge to the detriment of history as literature. Let us turn, fina ll y, to the adjective lmoQlx6s. Philo uses it substantivcl)' to mean " historia n,"'" but more oft en altributivcly, One such occurrence is very similar to the substa ntive. Whi le ex plica ling the drea m of Jacob (Gen. 28: 10) he says: "The informa tion that Terah left the land of Chaldaea a nd migrated to Haran , taking with him his son Abraham and his famil y, is given us not in order that we might learn, as from a historical writer, that certain people became emigrants . . . but lest a lesson ( I.UleT)~a ) about thi s thing mos t u!leful for life and .....ell-suited to man be neglected.""" T he "historical writer," on Philo's VteW, relates the facts for their own sake, or at least has nothing further ill mind; and this accords with the then standard vicws of \\,hal "history" and "history writing" were about. as we have seen. Similarly. he points out that Moses' account of Abrdham's famil y His not an historical genealogy (oUx UnOptkll "YEVEa;\o-yw) .. . but Cl bringing 10 light through signs of matters capable of profiting the soul (1fpct"YIUlTWV +Uxilv ~Aipa~ lruva).LEVWV 8ui:(J\If.l~AwvaVCl"TfTllJ; ..~) :~· ' Again the historica l as mere facts is contrasted with some mher matter, which ,he facLS symbolize. What is here implicitly denied , however, tha t the Penta teuch is to be understood in some sense histo rica lly, is elsew here ex plicitly maintained . Philo distinguishes the orades delivered by Moses into three kinds: "The one is about the creation of the world (XOOlJ.oJtOI.Co<;) . the next is historical ({O"tOQI.Xt1v) , the third is about legislation . ... " •, • ., ,.,
Phikl CfIfIl' , 14 and 23 . Philo Sfnc. ut. 1.342 . Philo Sat1. A6. 78 . Philo SQIII". 1.52. Philo CQ"I" 44 .
5H
Uta
of /listor;t
the histo rica l part ~rnl':a l~ic:.a l: of the gcncalOl'!;ical, om: pari is abou t thr punishmrnts "r thr impious, the olhcr is about the honors of Ihr jUM. Now WI' mu.~ t lita!r why hr [i , ~ .. M osrsJ ~an his law books with that I>arl and pU I Ihr pari about commands and punishOll"nt!t. s(,CClnd . For h t, did lIot . likf' a pros(' ~' ri tf' r (OUYYQ
mak(" it his bu:;i n(,,5S 10 Iran' h("hind ror post("rity r("corns or ancient df'eds ror th(" sa k,' f)r th"ir U!t.('/I'SS plrllsantllfss: rdthf'r , . , in ordu that hf' mi!(h t show 1\\'(1 \'f'~' nn'("ss,lry thill~s; .. ." !
Thus a hhough h(' maintains that c{'rtain passages ar(' not 10 be understood si mpl y h;s/oricaf{v, that is. rollowing standard Hdlenistic usage. as simply ractual. st ill he holds that these books do have a " hi storica l part:' A conjunction occurs hen' that is ci ecisive ror the d evelopment of the term " history" not only ill a ntiquity, but throughout th e Middl e Ages a nd well into modern times, Philo's method or ex plaining th e text orthe Penta teuch is allep;urical. In a vcry broad sense this means that the text is tu be undrrstood not accordi ng to Ihe words themselves. not li tera lly but , ra l hrr, according tn the "h:ssons" or which the a ctu al words arc mrrf'\y "symbols:' Wr n('ed not digress upon the intricacies of allegorical ex('gesis as Philo pracliced and taught it. ~' Lon~ berorr Philo, Gr('rk scholars had interpreted Hom er alle'" Philo P'lUm. I f P~". 1-1. ft Philo V. ,Hgl. 2.46-48. '" For the purpose of this study , tht details or particular allegorka l systems are oot important. It is sufficient to sho..... tht connection tM:twttn th e idn or history anti the literal le\'d or exegesis, ."nr a britf history of allegorical exegesis, Sn' J ohannrs GelTcken's article ~ Alle~o~' " in th(' EI'ICJdoptdi, of RtligiOll '114 Ef!tics, cd . .!am('s Hast· ings l Nf'w Ynrk, 1925). I : 328-3 1. For a m/)O't detailed treatmenl or Philo's allC'l!orism within the J ewish tradition, sC't E. StC'in, " DiC' allC'ltoriseht t:Jctg~ c\('s Philo aus Alexandria," Zmh,. f J. ttIUI I/tt"u1tflirlu lIi'JJ,lUrAttfl,n, 5 1 (1929): a nd on thC' rda tion between J ewish and Christian biblical tllC'gtsis. stt R. Ulwt, "Thf' Jewish Midrashim and Patriuic and Scholastic t:xt/l:esis or tht Bible," Studio. PII/rilf;rtl. I ! ,. Ttll/r u~d L'ttlt'II'CItIlIlB'. lll' Cm" . J. gUt"" /,;f"II /" , 63 (1957) I : 49'l-514.
59
His/OF} as a Litnary Genre
gorically. The stories involved, like those of the Pentateuch, played a role in the religious life of the community; but unlike the Pentateuch, these stories were not thought of as histories, that is, factual accounts. This is a crucial point. The Greeks and Romans repeatedly held. as has been seen, that the difference between history and ~try is predsely that a history must be true to fac t, must conlain accu rate information. Philo does not disagree; the historical is the factual for him. But besides its factuality, the account evident ly ha s anot her meaning; besides communicating the correct information, it also (a nd on Philo's view this is much more important) communicates a lesson. What is thus suggested , a nd for the first lime, is that the facts stand for or signify something beyond or behind the facts. Philo does not actually say this; at most he only suggests that what is historica l may be understood all egorically, that is, as containing a lesson with a message. Philo was speaking about things of J ew ish culture in the language of a different culture. He had no choice but to use words laden with associations acqui red over a period of almost a thousand years of cultural developmenl , associations which he, as an ou tsider relative to that culture, could scarcely have fully appreciated. And the Greek language itself, moreover, had formed in a way s uita~le for use in the Greek world , To speak Greek about things Jewish required the application of old words to new things." One has liulc difficulty in understanding why Philo should have used lmoQElv, lmoQla , and (moQlH xc)(; in the contexts in which he did . The origin orthe Passover Fea st and the manncr or installing the priests as well as information about rivers, islands. and straits are all subjects of " natural history" in a very old sense. In the sa me way. it was not too strange to suggest that the account of the world's genesis was a kind of " natural his· tory ." Nor was it particularly inappropriate to describe the sacred writings of the J ews as " historylike" since they include accounts of great leaders, notable speeches, and events of great emotional impa ct upon the relevant community. These are the furniture of an lO"toQia in the ordi nary sense. In addition to the characteristi cs that fit this new object for being called [OlOQu(6~. however, there are certain other characteristics that '" tl.· l . Marrou has
nOled l~ 'Dtx,rilla' et 'dOOpl.na· d;,".~ la languc des pt"re$ de I'eglise,·
Arcllivu",l..ahniratis M t"d;; A...... 9 ( 193-1): 12J hUlOo· wo rd$ ;Kqllire no:-,,· applied Hlo;J Ihings of Ihe Christian religion."
mo:-an in~ ~
bo:inl{
I in
Idea "111 i.I/II"!
run ( UlUlter tll the ilSS4K:iatiulls whk h, as pre"iulIs dis("lIssiull has revealed , those w(lrds (:;crriet! ill (;"eek .md R(lman thought . O ne insliulCe of this IlO1I1ial (hul only pm1iaJ ) tit in the language has JUSt been exami lled, Cl lllt:ernillK tl lc a llcgl)fK'a! illtcl"j)relatiulI ( If hisltlry. Similarir, a((Hllnt s of the ()ri~ill o f the wurld ur of mankind were nut nmsiden.:d histo r~ . I'lalU himsdf. in lht' \'l'I~' diOllogut:: \i'OIll whkh I'hilt) derives his "natural hishlry" of 1t'ITcslrial disastt'rs, has TimaClIS argue Ihal sill(c we ,ll"t: only hunl
't
;I'
IV The Early Roman Empire: History as Story and the Rhetorical Use of History by the Early Christians
HE " fall" of Egypt Undf:T Roman domination in 30 P.c. is a land· mark in the political and cultural fortunes of the anciem world . It marks the end of the Hellenistic Age, for (he Egypt of the PlOlc· mics was the last of the great Hellenistic kingdoms established by the successors of Alexander and its assimilation thus completes the unification of the Graeco-Roman world under the sole govtrnance of Rome. The fall of Egypt also marks the passing of lhe Roman Republic, the establishment of what we call the Roman Empire. At long last the civil wars are ended. Caesar, who sought to save." the Republic by unrcpublican means , is assassinated by a band of republican nobles in 44. After thirteen years of armed struggle among his co ll ~agucs and opponents, thirl~en y~ars of anarchy and bloodshed, Octavius d ~rca(s Anto ny at Actium in 31, thus s uppressing the last challenge 10 his own power and consolidating authority in a single government. The nexl two centuries saw the com pl ~ tion and perfection of the im~rial system; the age of th~ Pax RomQnQ. If these were two c~ nt u · nell of comparative peace and prosperity througho ut the empire, it was a peace witho ut freedom , in the sen se that government ser\' ice ceased to be widdy available and that private o pinion c~ascd to be one's own business only. On the one hand , poli tical power was no long~r the reward of persuasiv~ speech and , on the other , expression
T
61
Urn of Histo~,
ur an uprlllon disliked b~· 3n t·mJX'ror cou ld c·a sil y bring ruin and dealh . ThcSl' t\\'o IIt'W rt'atun's o f social lif(' had a Illllrhd errect on the culture genera ll y. first , all ('n\"iron mt'tlt of imperial danger. in trigue, capric('. j('alousy, ilnd spyin.'t du('s nut (' ncouragt' nt'a li \·ity. &cond, till' disa ppcara nn' or till" ~n'a t ill ccllt iw ror rhetorical stud y pla ced a strain un Ill(" predo minantl y rhetorical ('d ucational sys tem , which di ~ turtt"d such works as w('re nOlletheless produced . There rI"maim·et for pcrsntts so traim·d tht" oplions of pra c ti (~f' in tht law cou rts, rh etoric for its m'm sakc· . or lit('rature . As thl' new polit ica l inllu('llees wt"re m o n' strong ly (nr, :'11 It'ast. more sll.. adily) rdt, litera ry laste t('ndrd towa rd art ilkiality and nrna tf'llI'SS of slyl(' rx('rcised on tht'nl('S that \"ari('d (Only in tilt' dt·.~ret' or thrir an ificialil Y. Gradually tht' d isl inl"liun ht' lwr('n JXM'try ami prmc' was t"i1:lcrd a s both w('rc afft'c tf'd b y Ih,. innu('nn· of rhftnrit- . The list'" nflht.' lerm ··hislfll"\··· inlileSt.' Il'XIS rt'tain . lin· the illost 1><11"1 , Ihe linea lllt!" IlI .~ 01" rht· l,;tdil'r I'(' ril)(l : hut thl'n ' an' .~ hit"ts !If meaning a nd r('laxations of ho ulldaric's pr('\"iously resl><"cted. I.f t us look firsl at Roman tltou~hl.
The use of histOrilf as fact s or information is carried 011 in the Latin writings of lhe Imperial Age, and the kinds of subjects of historia remain the same: the facts or informat ion about natura l th ings, I informatio n generally ( rollowin~ Dionysius Thrax and the grammatical lradition),7 and information about persons.' But far more oft cn historia is unders tood to be about socia l and political c\'cnls. ' \Vhal thcse four uses of hiJton·a havc in common is ont' modal use understood a5 facts or information, which emphasizes the maller of the account. What is related by these uses of historia is Ihat the account in queSlion is factual. it is the (presu mably corrl'n) informalion. As in tht" ca rlifr period , however. so too in Ihe rf'mains of im peria l tim es , historia is used not only 10 refer to Ihe matter of the account , but to Iht' mann('r of tht" account-giving and. in particular, ' E.g., Apul. FI",. 16: PIt/I. 1.4.7: ~'tS IUS {J/"JJ. Lal. J.t·. ~bmtnini . p. 150, 35-36: Gell. .\ '.4 ~ . 14 . 1-2: H H~ . AJI •. p. 77, I: PI;n}" £p o 3.5.6: ISoranus l. Q, ,\f~d., in Kart tkichg ri l:H:r, Dir Gri"lt iMh~ Empiritmrhlllt IBtrlin, 1931 t. pp. 90, 2·1- 9 1. 2. ~ £.1/;., HYI/;. All, . p. 19, 1- 7: Quint . 11U1. 1.4.4. 8.18, 8.20. I .E.g., Cdl. 1\'A 2.16.6-7: H OT. C,,""_ 3.7.20: 0 ,·. Am. 1A.H : T,. 1.4 16: Phd ,. Fd. 4.6.2; P1io)· II"'· 35.139: Prop. 1.l.Iti, 4.7.64. I
E.!!;., .·ronm, p. 198. 8: Sun RJr" . 1.:1.
His/Dry as Story
63
as a written account. There is a variety of uses within this second or literary mode. In the most general sense, his/oria is used 10 refer 10 a written work either by its kind o r by its litl e .~ a nd it is also frequ ently used to name Ihis literary genre as opposed to o ther genres.' As in the ea rlier period , however, attempts are made to defin e the genre a nd d istinguish it systematically from other genres .' Histo ry, then , is a genre at least generally disting uished from other literary genres and , at least generally, is expected to relate the truth about the events narra led ; as we saw in the earlier period. it is a genre useful as a source of examples.' There is a nother use of hisloria in the second mod e, whi ch invokes the standards of the genre, standards of style a nd language ra ther than standards of accuracy, critical thought, o r thoro ughness of research.') In this second mode history refers to a litera ry genre, more or less defi nite, with its o wn characteristics a nd styles. It is something written or read, ra ther than something know n or understood . This is refl ected in the verbs and substan tives regula rly conj oined wilh historia : componere, scribere and legtrt, au.ctor and scriptor are the most common. As something known , hisloria is know n by acqua intance; the verb used is noJCtre. It is in thi s sense th at Vitruvius recommends that an architect " be acquainted with many histo ries (hiJ/oriat . .. plu.m nov;sst)!' 10 There is a single instance in which his/oria is said to ~ known in some ot her way. In the Sixth Sa/irt, J uvena l ad vises us, "Let not the wife of your bosom possess a specia l style of her own ; let her not hurl at you in whirling speech the crooked enthymeme! Let her no t know all the histori es (nte historia.J Jtint omnu ); let there be something in her reading which she does not understand ."" But this is the o nly such occurrence, and otherwise historia is something known only insofar as it is kno wn by acq uainl ance. \ E.g., Col u m(lI ~ RIIlI. 1.; .3; ).'estUI Glm. 1.11 1. I .U. Obsid ium. p. 210. 5- 9; Cdl. NA 1.1 1.1; Dv. n . 2.443--44; Sen. Cllfl l r. I.prat r: 18 , 3 .pra~r: 8, 10.5; SI/IIJ. 6. 15; Sen. Efl. 95.2, 11 ;.11; Suet. CIII"d. ; 1.1 , ;1.2, 42.2; DIIm . 20; Cal. 3. 3; Vd!, Pa l. 2.9.S. • Apul. AfxJ/. 30; Ffo, . 9, 20; Iior.
Th~ s~co lld
mode .. Iso includes the usage or hislorirus in earl ~' imperia l limt's; it is used s uhstantively to indica te ..... riters (If histories, that is, hi storians. So m~tim es parli cular hi storians ar/' m('nt iOl~ cd . tJ but more often it is historians as a group .1I Se neca USt'S hJl/oricus to indicatt" those who ..... rite descriptions of nat ural t hin~ s, " natu ral hi stories"; 1l but otht'r ..... ise hislorir; a rf" thuse ..... ho ..... rilt" ilbtlllt social and political events. And it is as wrillrs that Ihf")' arl' rd t"rrf'ci 10. They a rt' dist ing uis hed rrom utht'r kinds of ..... rit('rs l ; hy ~ i\' ill g a s traightrorward accoont of c\'('nt s l ~ ilnd Decause of th t' U SI' uf lan~ u age tha t is charaCleri slie n fthem ;11 and they pro\"idc us \\'ilh examples. I ~ Th e uses of his/oria and hiSloricus in early impt'rial lilllt"S see m \'u y much the samt'" as those of tll(' republican pe riod, hut it is \\'orlh noting that t he second mode, lilrrar}" gr nrr , is predominant in th e Helle nistic period , while both arc of rqual frcqu r ney ill th(' Roman . In addition to lhe shift in hala nce, the usage- of hiS/Drill is t'xpanrled in t .....o ..... a ys . The lirst is it drve-lopmcllt of a n t'arlirr use, lI!"igillally ohserved in the Attic drama and s till found in ('arl y imperial rinlf's. 10 indica te an accounl of Ihr life- or a cru cia l ('vent in thl' lif,' hf 11 person. In t ha t use Ihe persons (or e hara cte-rs) \\·hose " hi s turirs" wt' re referred tu wer(' semilcgendary. They had , perhaps, al one lime heen real human beings. But the-ir Ji"es had ncrn conlinuall y Tt',' xanli ncd and reinterpreted by the poets and playwrights. tlit' r1 \t'l\) r jc iall ~ a nd philosoph ers, and Ih us he-came in limr archetypal li\"l's, st uries Ihe common beli ef in which pru\"id rd Ihe alfcnj,·,. has is for tlw u!lity of Ihe G ree k people . I f lh(')' w('Tt' " persuns," Ihe-y we rt' not I.rdinary persons, not ord inary individuals, hu t what might he l."illkd g"1'ne-ric persons, Ihal is, capable of signifying the wholt' na tion , ) 1" ra("(" For exampl e, wha tt" 'cr particular mistake O edipus made, still it h·,tS ar· chetypaL Oedipus is EV('fyman in thf" sense that his mi sl a~. , ;:lT1d his fate are possibilitif's for each of us. And Ihr matt('!" was:-;n Lmli e-rstood . .. even 111 antlqully. 11 E.g.• G( II. NA 15.23.cap.: ~n . CO". Vt . 9.1: SW/If . D.2 1: SUO:I. (; 1/1"."' , 1:1. 2tr. ' ·f'II . I.J 7.2. H E.g., t'~cu, (;I.JJ. l...al . J.II. salula ri l porta, p. ~ 36, 27- :.18; Quint. !rul. 1.10.40, 2.104 ; ~n . C. III•. 7.2.8: Sw,u . 6 .14; S UO: I. RAtI. 1.5; Ti/). 6U . I ' SO:Il. Q.Nllf. Llt .2; 4.3.1; r r. hiJf"jrll {j~l"/I , Q.,V/lI. 1. 13.J . " Cdl. ,\·tt 13.7.6: Gran. tir .. p. 33, 10; Quinl. iNJI. 10.2.21 - 22: Sen. (. O~ . Hx. 9.1. ... Pw. &(rr. lIB.6; Sen . .1pocol. I. " !'Iiny E/!. 9. 16 .1: Q l,l int . I~J I. 1.6.1. 6. 11 : tt.D.G!> . •• Quill l. /tu l. 12.2.22, 11.1 7.
Pal.
History as Story
65
In imperial limes, however, the persons whose " histories" are mentioned have ~gun to lose that stature. The younger Pliny , for example, encouraged to write history by his friend Capito, says that he wants to do 50, "Not that I have any confidence of success . . . but ~cau se I hold it a noble task to rescue from oblivion those who deserve to be eternally remembered , and ex tend the fame of others, at the same time as our own ." 19 Pliny wants to rescue the deeds of certain individuals, not necessarily of heroic proportions, Similarly, Suctonius tells us that L. VohaciJius Platus "set forth the cxploits (m gtSlas) of Pompey's father, as well as those of the son, in several books. He was the first of all freed men to write history (scribtrt hiJtoriam ), in the opinion of Cornelius Nepos, which had been written on ly by men of the highest position before that time."20 FronlO, too, was encouraged by Marcus Aurelius to write a " history" of his brother's deeds ,21 and history about an ordinary mortal is a common use by Aulus Gellius .l1 Gellius seems almost aware of the lesser intrinsic importance attaching to a Jlistoria as he uses the term . He tells us " the en tertaining history (ioamda JriJtoria )" of how Papirius Praetextatu s got his surname." Although the tex t of Book 8 of his NIXtes Auicat has disappeared, the titles of the various chapters survive; that of Chapter 16 is "A pleasant and remarkable history (JriJtoria ... iocunda tt miranda ) from the books of Heracleides Ponticus." And Chapter 5 of Book 6 contai ns "A noteworthy history (Jristoria , .. mnnoralu digna ) about the actor Polus ." Earlier, to call something a " history" at leas t impli ed that it was an accurate account , and that thcre was some importance attaching to it . For Gellius , however, what seems 10 be important is not so much that the account be true or important but that it be entertaining or that it point a moral. 24 Aristotle had already distinguished poetry or fables from history on the grounds that poetry aims at pleasure, while history aims at truth or " PHny Ep. 5.S. I, trans, Mtlmoth (l...(M:b). ilDS uet. Rful. 3; cr. Pliny Ep. 6. 16.71f. The account 10 TacilUs of h is uncle's deuh in tht eruption or Vcsuvius is leiJlltrilf, though he is aware that " there is a great difference belwC'Cn a lelter and a IeUll/rill." 71 Fronto, p. 191,4-5. !t E.g .• Gell. NA \.8. 1, 23. 1; 3.7.cap.; ...5.cap.; " .5.6 ; 14.u .p.; 6 .19.ca p.; 7.9.ca p.; 13.2. t . ft Cell. NA 1.73.cap. :k Gell. NA 4.20. 10; and cr. Apul. Md. 2.17, 6.29, 7, 16, 8.1. ThaI Gclti UI had leu than scholarly intentions in writing hil wort is indicated by his sayinR that it was hi5 el1deavOII' (ne"f0tiNIII) only "10 It"'W Ihese NiI,ltt$ or mine ligh tly here and Ihere wilh ;It few of theK nowers of history (ltiJtorilU j1o.fClliis)" [ t 7.21.1, \rans. Rolre (Loch» ).
66
Idta
of Hisfo~"
accuracy. Th is ancien! dis tin ction between pot"try and hi story is now beginning to fade . Scnt'ca advises Ih e hot-te mpe red man 10 train his mind . " Let the reading of pocms soothe it and let history hold it by its fables ifabulis); let it be led solil y and ddi ca lt'l y:' ~" Suetonius info rms us abou t Tiberius that " his spt'cial a im was a knowl edge of fabulou s history (noliliam his/{)riatjabularis). which he ca rrird to a silly and laughable rxtcnt. ":/I, And j lls t as G('lIius fqui vocalffl in Iht" d istinction between hisloria ami nnnaltJ. so IUO h(' ('quivoca les about hisloria and Jab ula . Tilt" title of Book 16. C h apler 11 is: "His/oria taken from Iht' books of Hrrodotus a ho u! tht' destruc tion or,h(' " s)'Hi": but then he says l ha l it was in Ih(" lo urth huok uf Hf' rodotw; that he found " this fablc (Mncjaouiam) ahout tht· Psylli ."!; This firs t e xpansion ur tilt' idra uf history suggests a relaxation of the earlier standard s. The Ilt'rsons itn'oh-m a re sti ll. for t he most part , fa mo us. hut thry a r(' simpl y not of th(' sut:ial and cultural stat· ure of the ea rlier usagr. Ami as t he di sti nction bcl\.\·t'f'1l history and ~ try is blurred . truth or a C (' ur ac ~' as th(' dis tinni\'l' ('haract('ristic of t he kind of a C'count called histaria ~i\'('s way s()mt'what to e n(rrtai n· mt:nI o r pleasu rf' . Hf'rf' hisloTio s('t"ms \ 0 han' murr Iwad y the mean· ing of o ur wurd "story" th an nf o ur word " his tory"': indted . this would seem to be Ih(" brginning of tht· dt"\'rlopmc llt of .. S lOry ... •.. If a his to ry is an ar.co unl of Ih(' 1i1(' I!'i ahoul Tt' al thi nKS tht Ilt)in! of which is to inform , and a titbit· is an a Cl'uun l of unTral thin~ s the point of whi ch is 10 enlcrlain or In plt·asf'. 111(' 11 a s tory is all a ccount of the fac ts about real Ihin~s thr puint of whidl is to ('nterta in. please. or point a mo ral. The second ex panded USt' of hisloria is history a s the past. l\lost uses of historia about (,\'en ts ha\"(' to du wit h Ih(' li te,MY genre . When il means thr- fac!s or informa tiun . hO\\'r\,('r. the limits nf il an' \"agu('. History about pe rsons is usua ll y limited tll ;t particu lar episode in Ihe person 's life ; prrh aps this is h('uusl' of t ht· rx igt'ncit's of dramatic lite rature in w hich this USt' is most often found. a nd prrha ps ht"cause Srn. Dilll. 5.Y, 1. ... Sur!. r i". 10.3; "mt t·r. ju\'. SfJl.
1\
1U. 1 7.~.
': Cdl..\'A 16. 11.3. S imilarl ~' M JIG / illt ill U ~'/I: ...Im. rt.lI:ul;uly r~lt rs to a ("(OUIIII or tht gods artt r ...·horn Ihl:' cunut ll alioll~ an' n;!;mffi: fO .l!: .. pp. :11 . 18: 111. 7: ti6. 6: 71. 25; 73.21-22. :\ l:\o Grll. SA 3.3.11. U ~'~inus him:w-Ir: Surwn ill~ I~ II , U$. •• ... a~ calltd Pol~" hislOr on ac(ou III or hi , koo ...·lrdF\t of amiquil y. :, son fir hI1/0r;1I ~ ( (j/llI1lWl. 2(1) . , - Th is 1:11(' 11 ...· " I' /,j"/"",,, '" ",a/"" I"" h.'('1I III I It, [)"I1l I ~ II ' 1" '1 i~t " .. i:o." . 1" /"" f '" l.I" ~""_'f fI,. 1.,..,in'.( '''IJ.i,. 11",1 '( ;wlH f/l lllilr {lot'jp/,il( : ., \ 'ulo' 1('I". 11'11'11'1 . :~ : :!:IU.. :1-1 . C l . H OT. 5..,,11. 1.3: Prop. 3.2tJ.2.i- 2H.
"t..
67
History as Story
PlO;. or what we should call " biography," was a literary genre distinct from history.'19 The limi ts of a history about natural things are those of the kind of thing that is the subj ect-genus. The limits of a history about events as literature are tho!>e of a particular written history. HiSloria as facts about events should derive its limits, li ke history of natural things. from the limits of the subject-genus . But whereas the limits of a genus of material things is, a t least broadly speaking, clear, the limits ofa genus of immaterial things-for ex",m· pie, the events of a nation or people-arc not clear without furthcr specification. Thus history as facts about events of a nation could be taken , ana logously with history of natural things, to indicate all the facts, the aggregate of information, the past as it were--though it is not in general clear whether it is the whole past or some portion of the past. When Cicero complains that through the preservation of laudatory speeches " the history of our affairs (Jrisloria rerum nostrorum ) has been made more faulty," )O it is not clear what "affairs" he means, though by "our" he presumably means " of Rome." He says this explicitly in another place, observing tha t "Roman history is obscure {obscura ut Iristoria Romana)," since we do not know the name of the father of King Ancus Martius.'1 Elsewhere, however, Itiston'a seems 10 indicate a more extended past . He criticizes the Epicureans because "in your discourses history is silent (ltistoria muta tst ). In the school of Epicurus I have never heard ment ion of Lycurgus, Solon , Mihiades. ThemiSlOdes, Epaminondas. "32 And he sometimes even seems to be thinking of the past altogether; for it is objected tha t, although the oracle at Delphi has declined , still "you must admit what cannot be denied , unless we pervert all history (nisi omntm historiam Jurvtrttnmus ), that for many centuries the oracle was true. "" History as the past is a somewhat more frequent use in imperial times. Propertius says, " Fame, Rome, is not ashamed of your history (Fama, Roma, tuat non pUdd hislonOt)."J' Aulus Gellius relates a discourse of the philosopher Taurus about the courtesi es that fathers "On incient biognphy, KC A. Momigliino. "Problem, or Ancient
8ioRraph )",~
QuCllrJe CMJrib-M/(! GitCII Sum'/I drgli Sflltli CI/I.U>ci (Rome, \969), pp. 77- 94, and 171, IJfmtmJ o/Grnl. BiogrttfJ"} (Cambridge: H uvard University Prol, 1971 ). :. Ci r;. BOl. 16.62 . 11 Ci r;. R'P. 2.18.33; er. Di~. 1.18.37. 12 Cic. Fi". 2.21.67; Di~. 1.24.50.
er.
"Cic. Di~. 1.19.38 . .. Prop. 3.22.20; abo 3.4.10, and cf.Juv. Selt. 2.103.
Dn~l
GB
-
Uta of . Ilis/or.,
and sons ought (0 show ~ach other a long with L; an example from Roman history (IX hu/oria Romana )." And he tells us " what errors Julius Hyginus observed in th~ Sixth Book orVergil, errors in Roman history (in Romalto his/oria trralos):'I:, Thc cider Plin y insists thal horns, prop«=rly so called , art' found only on quadrupeds, and h e m:~ reckons as fabu lous both AC{('()n "and also Cipus in thr. Latin history (in. Latia his/orio ):' who arc allr:gcd to lIa\'(' grown horns." In these passages hisloria sct'ms 10 indicatc the aggregate of inlormation about evenls. that is, the past. From a modern point of vic\'o the two expanded meaningsj usI dis· cussed , history as .story and histo ry as the past. might seem 10 mUH in opposite directions from Iht' older c('nter of meaning , For wt' te:nd to associate: the notion of "s ton'" with liction and falst'hood but "t he: past" with tht' "scicncr" of histo ry, which , w(' s upposr, tells us the facts and tht' truth . From the ancient pHint of view, however, the two expansions were congruent , al> is illus trated by an epigram on the too li ttle appreciated fact that Vt'rgirs .-tf'IIf';d sur\'i\'ed the author's death only in viola tion of the j ~xplicil provisions of his will . I quote the ent ire passage from Probus ' I.ift of Vir,eil (:12-'18 ); The Af1If'id ..... as Sct vro by AU/ot;U5tus , althou!(h I \'r'q~ i ll himsdf had prO\'ided in his will that th(' parIS !If it that hr had nUl publishc:d shou ld not survi ve: which Ser\·ius \ 'arus atte~ t s in th(' followin.': cpignm : Virgil had ordcr('d dt'5truyed in devlluring £1amu Th('se w ngs .....hich s in~ the Pbrygia n leilder. run';1 and " ;lrlUS IOj.{t·lht'1' "pp(l~': ~ 1It1 , ).(Tt'a l t' ~ 1 C:a ~ lr,
])u
11111
allow it
;ltIcI
art'
luul;.ill g'
" h t'!' L.uian
hi sl ur~' ,
To preserve the: written poems is to prest'n't' thf' hisloria, the: aggregale of information about the pas t. There are some other occurrenct's, however, in which it is less clear wlu':ther what is meant is tht' infiJrmatinll fX"r se or a wrille n account. Vergillaments t he loss of Octa\"ius' Roman " history:'" Gr-llius me n'\ Gt!I. ,v. , 2.2.n p.;
rr.
Epi.f. . H , I!.!!. ... Plin~· H,' · 11.1 23. Thf' Slory of Cipus is .t! .. lro oolh in Q v. ,\lrl. IS.S65 and in \ ·al . :.tax, 5.6.3. Gdli u! un f" ·f'n riiSlinKui1h IX1"·f'f'JI kuowill!it aboul PraXilf'lf's tJ/
IO. 16.np.:
liI"iJ I1 tJ/ himmll Cl3. 17.4) . " V f'r!( , CIIIIII. 11 (1 4). h.
~larl .
Hislory as Story
69
tions Asellio "and several other writers of Roman history," and tells us things that are "written in Greek history."" Similarly, Pompeius Festus tells us how Rome got her name according to .. Antigonus, the writer of Italian history" and mentions a "writer of Cuman history."" " History" in these passages may refer to an unspecified written account-that is, the proper reading may be "writer of an Italian history" or "written in a Greek history"~r it may refer to the subject of the writing, the Greek, Roman , or Italian past. Perhaps there is some of each involved . The unity of a history as the facts about events was previOusly episodic, similarly a history about persons. In a larger or smaller compass, it was the facts about some past events. In this second expansion , history as the past, these racts are being drawn together into a conceived whole. There are not very many such uses in early imperial time5 , and they are often equivocal. However, ror the first time lu'ston"a is being used to indicate Ihe whole past of a nation or a people; for thc= first time " history" resembles what we mean when we say that something "has a history." Arter the Battle or Actium the political dependence or the Greek world on the Roman was complete. Mainland Gr~ce, along with Macedonia and Thessaly, had already been united as thc= province or Achac=a. And now Egypt was being exploited ror Rome. A hot~ of anti-Roman sentiment and hence kept 5ccurely under Roman domination, Alexandria ceased to be the greatest eenter of literature and science; the Greek cities of Asia Minor, to whom Rome granted a measure of municipal freedom , came to have a vigorous cultural lire in the first centuries of the Roman Empire. This is reflected in the unfamiliar names of the towns rrom which many writers or this period came. The remains of Greek intellectual life under the early empire are far more extensive than those of the Hellenistic Age; but they show little creativity, little originality. If this later age: sees the: first flowering of the: prose romance, it also sees the increased production of catalogues, compendia, anthologies, and compilations. There is a marked decline in poetry; the living movements or the age were in prose, but a prose which, like the Latin prose or the same time, is ·~II . NA 1.13.10; 6.1.1. ,. $.". Roman, p. 328, 2- 7.
70
/dtD OJ Hislo~"
strongly marked by the influence of rhetoric-and for the sa me feason: in the Greek·s~akjng world as in the Latin-speak ing, roucalion was it predominantly rhetorical enterpri se a nd , consequently , rhetoric influenced ever)' branch of intellcclUal culture. Nor was this influ ence, on tht' whole, bt=neficial. Thr uratorical sty le of the Hcl1t'nistic Age tended 10 he flowery and bombastic. Toward Ihe ('nd of the period a Traction SN in. an attempt to Trlurn In an idealbO:l..-d purity of the ancie nt Alti c . ~' This " Allicism ," h OW('\'t'T , nl) [('ss than the wAsian ism " it oPJXlst"d , wa s rarrif'd tu ('x tr(:n1(' s. in this case' to an excessive and lud icrous archaism which, i ll tUrI! . prU\'okL-d a enu nlerreaction . U ndC'T the empire, from our point of\'j(,w at !i'as!. Ihe worst
characteristics of both st\·les wl"re ('ombined in a rent'\\'('d burst of rhetorical activity called th,' Sel'Ond Sophistic. The shirts of meaning and relaxation s of s('mantiC' boundaries observed in the uses of his/ono during tht· t"ariy (·mpif(· may also be found in th e uses of lmoQEtv·{mOQlo. though there is litt le c han~(' by and large. The verb is st ill used occasio nally in its old est st"ns(" of " inquiring , " tI and a few times it indicates learning by inquiry or discovering:'? Usua ll y, as in the Hellenistic A!l:c . it mcans " report ," " relate," or " record ." What is " reportro " may st ill he facts about natural things and customs. H and in the empirical m('dica l tradition "reported" case histories a r(" \' t"~. important ." Episod('s in tht" livcs of semilegendary persons are also " report('d ."11 but mosl often social and pol itical events. I/o These us('s of thC' \'('rh are familiar: hut the usage is relaxed in se\'era l ways. First, the pt"rsons arc of decreased '" Ho...·ever, A. 1::. Dougla:s l ~ l ntrodu(:tion~ tu .11. 1;'1/; (;j(t1(111 is n""~J, ed. l>O ugl,u (Oxford, 1966). pp. xii-xi"1 arguc5 that the Alli(:ill COlllro\,rfS>' 'us fral but Ihat ~ill significance has bren greatly cuggeralM b)' modern !cholan" (p. xiii). Sce .. Iso E. S. Gru~n, "Cicero and Calvus," Han.'fJrd SI. i~ Cl. Pfti/III. 71 ( 19661 : 2:12-:1:1. I' ArT. £pUI. 2 .14.28, Ludan SJ'. D. 11. Piu. C~,iIlJ . 5 16C, S.I:: . .\fa/ft . 11.191. "Arr. £pit /. 3.7.1. S.E. Ma/It 11.1 91. " Act. PIN. 5.7 (L>ie\s, IX; 419. 12- UII. Uel';«'l. Q. " "11<. p. Ii!I. ~I- l i. l'I u . .\I lt•. 11 ~5 F. QCO!lI" i .70IC. I!.7:l38 . S.E. Py •• :-1.215. 232. .. See Ihe Gakn ic tr~albt 1t:EQi riJ~ il(X0tTJ~ o!pi}a[~ in Ka rl D('ichgrlibt r. D jt Grittltu,ltt Empiritmcm.lt (Berlin. 1930), p . 127, 11. 2 1. 25, and 1211. I. Tt is arguable that [mOOtl\, means " to inquirc" al 127, 2B, 31. 35, lInd cspedall>' 12B, 20. But latOQia is dcfined as ~ thc narnllioll (6u'lyflOt;) of whal has oftell br~n experienced in thc same wa y" ( 121.9- 10; and cp. [Gal.] t/ooyWyTj '" latQC'll; 100. 11- 20),50 Ihat n ch or the arguablc citations abo,·C' ('I n bt read as r('laling In thosc ... ho ha,·c handed do ... n, i.c. " rel ated" or " rc£onied" ("as(' hi5loriu. " E.g. Luda n Alu. I , B. S.l::. Malll . 11.1 91. .1::.11'. D .C . 7.25.6 (Zonaras ), 7.2.5.1. Hdn . HiJI. 3.7.3. 7.6. Lucian HiJl. { //fIIf'. 1. Piu. Gill. AI1I. 3470-1::, Athen. 6.23.5C-D. 1.217 f·, 8.211." . 13.60.50-1::,14.6 158,6481::.
.se",,,.
History Q$ Story
71
stature. Sextus Empil"icus sets down things tha t arc "recorded" about Pyrrho:' the founder of Skep ticism, and about Pythagoras ..a Then again, what "is related" may have to do with people famous in political affairs. Dio Cassius spea ks of a certain Quadratus whose mistress, Marcia, became the mistress of the emperor Commodus, elder son of Marcus Aurelius: " It is related ({moQ£lTUt) that she greatly favored the Chrisfians and did them many good turns, in sofar as she could do anything with Commodus.".9 The ~rsons are also sometimes just ordinary people, though notable for some particular. Sextus Empiricus, for example, cites Aristotle's Mtleor%gica (3.4 ): "Aristotle tells (lmoQEi) of a Thasian who fancied that the image of a man was always going in front of him . " )0 There is a second relaxed sense of lO'tOQElV in which the stature of the persons involved is greatly enhanced; for it is also used to "relate" episodes in the lives of the gods outside the dramatic context . Dio Cassius remarks that Commodus strangled two Cilician brothers, "j ust as Heracies, when an infant, is reporled (LOT6{»tTat) to have strangled the serpents sent against him by Juno."SI Similarly, in his Homtric QutStiotu, the literary critic Heracii tus says, " It is record ed ({moQOuOl, lit ., they say) that Mnemosyne is the mother of the Muses" and several times observes what is, or ought to be, recorded about the gods . n Plutarch, too, frequently teUs us what is " reported" about the gods. s3 These relaxed uses also suggest that the earlier pres umption, that what was being related was facts of some imparlance, no longer holds so strongly. Among those whose " reports" are ci ted in these texts are not only historians, in the broad sense of anyone who writes a prose account of past events, but also philosophers, antiquarians a nd scholars, poets and rhetoricia ns. For Pluta rch, at least, the factuality of what is reported seems to have little to do with the instances in which he uses the verb; he even tells us5-t what " the mythographers relate (Ol ~u8oAoyoiivT£~ [0tOQOuol) . " ./ .llalh. 1.272 . .. MalA . 9 ,366; cf. Piu. QCOIII>. 7. 715£, 733C, 8. 728E, etc. .. 72.4.7; cr. Piu. A/"". Ftnt. 330A, 33 1F, QRD"'. 2720, elC. ,co Pp . 1.84; cf. Piu. Mill . I 136C, QRDIft. 267B-C, 272F. " 72.7.2; cr. Hdn. Hut. 1.1 1.5. " pp. 39, 15--40, 9; 63, 5- 13; 77, 9---19; 80, 20-81, 9; 84, 11- 16; ilnd 89, 2- 15. 'It E.g., Piu. FD1t. R_. 3208 ; 11368; QCfllI•. 9.738f , 74 IA; QGr. 2938 ; QRfIf/I. 759A, 27810'. 285E . ... Piu. Qjltml. 2680.
"'tU.
72
/dta of Hislory Similarly with lO'tOQlQ in tht: Grt=c:k of the early e mpire. h still
means, as in the Hellenistic period. a factual account in terms of the account-giving, that is, a literary genre, ei ther as a ge nr~' or as a work of that gen re, a history;\Ii And I.ucian wrOle an entire work on How to Write History:~l He distinguishes history from ~lry (as well as from panegyric) and insists that it be kepI separate."" In voking th(' ancient distinction , he says Ihat poelTr aims at pleasure but history must aim at usefulness and at "setting fo rth lht" truth (tit" ti} ~ 0.)..T}6dar;; bllkwOlV ) ...... " For this o nc thing [i .I',. to rclatt' the rHo t as it happened, wr;; btQ6:x9'l h 1tElVJ . as I havt' said . is lhe peculiarity of history (t610V [atoQlac;). Onc must sac rificl' only 10 truth (Tfi clAT]8dQ), if onc is goi nR to write history; and one must subordinate all other aims to this one.""" Herod ian agrees with this.hl So dot's Plutarch ,62 though h(' is so keen ly aware of the pleas ure tha t history gives as to suggest that th e pleasu re of fi ction and poetry deri\'(' from their simi larity to history in point of trulh .ft ' And Iht' 5ubjt'ct matter of history must have a ce rta in dignit y, al leas t ac('ording 10 Dio Cassius, who ortt=n eharaclerizt=s incidt=nts as worthy c)r un worthy of the digni ty of hiSTOry (6 tils lcnoQlas 6yx~ ), ur wOfl hy of a plac(' in hi story. b4 The noun is also used in its other mode, as a n account the fac tua lity of which is t=mphasized rather than Ihf" account-giving; and this, as in the earlier period. about social a nd political even t s~ \ and also about huma n customs or natural things.'''; Thus in Galen and the empirica l tradi tion the use of a fact ua l account (lcnOQlO) of previo us cases, rt=mt=dies used , and their rt=su its is til(' repository of the JtEiQo or £lUttlQlO· ' that is their slarli nR poi nt .... and their difTerenc(' from E.g., D.e . 72.23.2, Mu. T yr. Diu. p. 28, 5; S.t: ..\flflh. 1.063. '" E.g., D.e. 37 .17.4; 4O.6H: Did. III D. 12. 47; Hdn . Hil l . 1.11.1 : 2. 1.1 : 15. 11 - 13;
!II
Lucia n H UI. (1I1lSf'. 55; PIu. Cni6J. 5 17F. " Th~ exp~ssion
ImOQiov O\l"fYQO!p€iv occurs frtqul'llI l ~': Hid. r~IIJ(,. 2, 4. 5. 6. 16,
17 .
... Lucian Hid. tlllUCT. 1.8, and 10; er. Hdn . J/isl. 1. 15.7 fin . \4 Ibid. 9; d . 42 and 63. ie Ibid. 39; Max . T yr. also appreciatts th(' td ul'a tional \';llu(' of .IIislQ~1 [DiSI . p. 28, CH;) .
•• Hd n. Hut. 1.1.1 , 1.4. 11 Piu. M lfUglI . 855B-F.
() Piu. HQ" PQJs. 1092!-'- 1095A: cr. Max. Tyr. Diss. p. 18, 5. .. D.e . 54.23.]; 57.24.6; 59.22.-S; 66.9.4: 67.8. 1; 72.18.3. ~ D.e. 56. HI.!; VllI. (;, ... ~ 75 1!...C
"E.g., App. H L>l. 12.103; (;.. 1. '1'11'11. 'F.ml>., p. :.!~i . m... IK: l'lu. Q!.:,,,,;o. 8.i2.jIJ. ~' QQiat . (127,9- 10 D.); a lf;nio. 3.2. 12 (95, 15-2OD.); dooy. (91. ~33 D.).
to
dooy. (100. 17- 20 D.);
1..-(. 11/1.
ril. (9 1, 29-33D ).
History 4$ Story
73
th~
competing dogmatic and m~thod ol og ical medical schools,69 as well as an important ~ducational tool. 1II Two further points ar~ worth noting about this use of the case history: first, because other schools also employ such cas~ histories" and because not all such accounts are necessarily true, "some criterion of the history «((J'toQla) must be found , by which we shall distinguish the true one from the false ones. " 72 And second, the criterion turns out to be 1t£LQ
" atMt.
~. ( 147, 27-31 D. ).~ T~ empirio use prior
!mOQla
;u
much as
possible:" (~C't . (127,8--9 D .)]. ?o t'qllOT. ( 126, 23- 127, I D.): ~ ... it is impossible for um: who is learning to happen upon all symptoms and 10 make his ow n obse rya tion of eyerylhing. So, le5t he spend his "'hole: life karning, but rat he r 5Orn('liltl(" make U K of the art, fo r this reason they !Mlr th at history is usefu l for pr-Klicing medicine: (xpi,n...,a u ",pO<; TO Lo.TPruUV "'" (aT~(lv) . "
" Ibid. (97 , 9-11 D.). n Ibid. ( 121, 11-14 D.).
n Ibid . ( 127, 20--30, 128, 3 D.) and ' bm. 41uo:avEl . (128, 12- 20 0 .). ,. PSC'lIdo-Lllcian E...,. 8.406, trans. Macleod (Locb); cf. PhiiOltr. [".. 2.9.7 (p. 355, 15); C alli'tr. S/#I . 5.4 (p. 427, 22). " ' bid. 15.41 4. tran,. Madc:ud (l..oc:l» . The S
74
Uta of History
lOQlau;) or arc enigmaticall y expressed- arc usdess . -' 1" And he rela tes that the Argo was the first ship 10 sail the seas, as " it has been handed down by history (OtU ~«; {moQta;:), "71 Plutarch addses busybodies to mind their own business: " Shin you r curiosity from things without and turn it inwards; if you enjoy dealing with a history of troubles ([moplu XQxfuv), you have much to do at hOI1lC:"M There are a lso a few instances in which. para llel I/) the l.alin. 10TOQ(O seems to indicate th e aggregate of past facts . Lucian says, ., ,.\ few points from ancient hi story (rile; oQxatC; lOloQlac;;) I remember arc to the point , and I may as \Veil add Ihf'm. " ;" And Appian. speaking of the risc of Rome, sapi. "These things many C rC'('ks anci many Romans ha ve already written down , and Iht' history (,; imoQlo) is even longer than that of Maccdon , which was thr 101lA:l'S I h<-Iore then . " 11(1 It is not entirely clear in these passages 10 what t'xtrnl " Iht, past " is meant and to what extent written " histo ries." It seems prudent to suppose that both are meant ; or, rather, th.u "thr past" is a meaning Iha l has not ye t become scparalt-d from the older mranings. There is anothrr use of thr 1I0un as factual account. found only in th e Greek : history of o pinion!! or ideas . Beginning his inquiry into moral virtue, Plutarch says: ·'It is bellrr. howr\,er, to run quickly through Ihe opinions of o thers, 1I0t sn much lor thr sake of history (OUx {moQlo~ EvEXO) as of making the- proJX'r unt's drarer and morc firmly established , when Ihesr ha\'e bern pn:sc nltxt ... ~ t Scx tus Empiricus uses " history " in the samt· way 10 rrfer 10 an account of pre\'ious opinions. Concluding a r('view of Ih(' opinions of Democritus and others , he !lays. "Tht" hi !l lory of the anci('nts, Ihen, about the criterion of truth ( ~ tWV ItOAO LWV ItEQl T01) XQttllQLO\J ti) ~ aA'TjOf,ta<; Unopw.) was SIIt·h .....' :\11(\ lilt' Sloit· Epklt'lus OhSI'I'\·t:S that the Master Argument has three in('Ulll l)atihle premises: ·' If. then , somebody asks mc, ' Bul which pair of thest' do you maintain ?' I shall give the an~wt:r to him that I do lIo t know (oux olba) but " S.t:. M. II! . 1.2 78. lranl. 8u",' ( l.~bJ. AI5<J 2.96: n S.E. AI.tIr. 9.32; cf. Luo.n HipI'. 2.67 .
~ . 57 .
" Piu. CM,iOJ. 5 15D; also 5 1SC. an d er. 5 1(;1), '" Luci.n Laps. 7; cf. MlIJI . T r r. Diu .. p . 28. 6 . ., App. p,tl(j 12, but h(' prut'«ds tu talk .bou! !hl' prnpc-r arrall,l1;('",I'''' cf. B Cil'. 9.67 .284 . " PIu. P,4 Vi,l. 440t:. a S.E. M all!. 7.140: 8. 14; also 7. 190.
ofhi ~
work :
History as Story
75
that I have been given the following history ({(J"[OQlav To~a{rtllv )."1I3 He goes on to list pairs of premises that various philosophers have accepted . In giving his own reply, Epictetus compares himself with the grammarian who uses a similar formula when asked for his own view about a literary maller; but while that is of no great conse· quence in a literary matter, according to Epictetus, philosophers are not entitled to give that reply ," So while we seem to have a distinctly philosophical use of " history" here, history so understood i:i still cun· sidered philosophically insufficient. Certainly this third new use of "history" in Greek to indicate a factual account of opinktns is not entirely new. Aristotle often usedl\\ an account of the opinions of his predecessors la clarify the issues on a given subject. The same practice seems to have been followed by his successors,- And in their desire for catalogues, compilations, and anthologies the Hellenistic and Roman ages, the Gr~k and the La· tin, produced a whole literature of the recording of opinions and ideas, doxography." What is new under the empire is calling such an account in Greek a "history," " AIT. £pitl . 2.19.5. "Ibid. 2.19.1- 11 ; a lso 2.21. 10. .. Aristotle's use of his predecessors is extensi\lely discusxd by Harold Cherni» (Arisloll, 's CrilicisM tf P'tl«r.,ic PlliI""lIy (Balti mort;, 1935) and A m/oil, ', Cri/ici.slll tf PI,~ .PId IN Aeany (Bahimort;, HMi)). This lItack on Ari.lOde'. credibility at a historian was 10 thorough and pt;nuasi\lt; that by 1957 Guthrit; reh compt;lIt;d to .rgut; l ~ ArillotJc as ill Historian of Philosophy," JHS 77 ( 1957) : 3.5-41J that C hcrniu and thost; who acct;ptt;d his vit;ws had gont; too far . To bt; critical was ont; thing; 10 rc:j ttl him whott; cloth was too much. 1nt; problt;m i. important, bt;ClutC 10 a very grt;ll txtt;fl! our traditional picturt; or Iht; hillOry or philosophy up to Arillotlt; dcpt;nds upon Ari"ollt;; t;itht;r dirtttly, through hi! commt;nts on his prt6J. Kerrt;Iri ["Rect;nl Work on Pnsocratic Philosophy;" AIItn. P"i~J. Q. 2 (1965)J cs· limated the significan« or this corn~cdy : " If this view wen 10 hie correct it would hie nearty btal to tht; traditional pielUrt; or Iht; Prt;SOCratics built up by .cholars O\It;r a hundred yun" (p. 130), And he sides with Guthrit;, as do many. But tht; ract that tht; problem ha. ceased to be discuued dOts not make it go away, and as rt;Ctntly as 1975 Malcolm Scholfit;ld l"Doxog raphica Anaxagoru," Hmntl 103 ( 1975): t-24J doubted Aristotlt;'S (a nd TheophruIIlI') nliabilily as JOUTCts on Anaugoras . •'OT a modtralt; t;\lalu:uion of Aristotlt;, sec Kurt \1011 Frilt, .. Arislode's Contribution to the Practict; and Theory or Historiography," V"i". IIjCtltif. N i. ill PltiitJI"It;J, Vo!. 28, No. S.p. IIS . • Van Frill, "Aristotle's Contribution," pp. 11 8-19. " The rc:m ainl of all the Greek doxOfraphell arc: collected in Helmann Diets, DU8· I,yhk G,IItd. He includes At;tius, Arius Didymus. Theophras\Us, CiCt;TO, Philode-mus, Hippolylus, Plulan:h, Epiphanius, Oakn, and Ht;rmt;ius. H is " Prolegomena" (pp. 1-26S) umains the basic dl,cussion of Iht; subject,
76
idta of History
The ra nge of possible su bjects for h isloT)' has grown, and now indudes ordinary or famous persons , and the gods-history unders tood as slory . Two chara cteristics of history from its ('arl it's t beginn ingsdiscerned already in the U~5 of iO'twQ in the Iliad-arc accuracy of account and social im porla nce of subjrcl. When history is u nde r$lood as story, however, the social importance of subj ect is somewhat diluted. Accounts of ordinary or fam ous peopl e mar be 1l00('worlhy o r interesting, but they have not the impacl of the account of Oedipus,
10, or Hecuba . If importance of subject is diluted , accuracy of account is virtuall y 105 1. Wh a t is important to a story is nOI that it be accurate, but that it be e ntenaining or edifying. Then too. (1,\ least in Greek , pas t idt=:as or opinions ahoul a topic a rt=: now a s uhjecl for hislOry. Galen 's d oxographical Histc'.~ cJ Plrilosop".l (1(£Ql q,tAooOtpou {atOQlOS)1M rt=:prcsenls pro bahly Iht=: earl ies! occurrencr of thr cx prrssion "history of philosophy ." It s hould he dear, howcvl'r, Ihat by "history" he re is mea nt s im ply the fa cts. or accu rate information. Galen 's slend er book is a sorl of fi eld guidr to phi losoph y. He ht=:gins with a b rit=:f account of the origins uf ph ilosophy. tht'" succession of philosoph ers, and the parts, problems. and te rms of philosophy. Thl' remainder of Ihe work ill la rgrly tak('n up wit h various problrms of physics and the opinions that had been hdd abou l Ihrm hy prc,·ious philosoph ers. Thi s is history of philosophy. tht=:n . not in the srnsl' Iha! prt=:vious philosophies arc ta kt=:n 10 he integrated whoks in wh ic h condusions a rc advanced on the basis of argumrnt s adducr-d , bU I in the sense that these arc th e fa cts as 10 what pTt.· ,·ious philosopht=: rs said about a given problem or tupic. And fina ll y. du"rc is th(' inci pie nt use of " history " to indica le the aggregatt=: of fac ts about Ihl' past (If something. Christi a nity began as a religious and poli tica l reform mo'·eme nl among a small national and religious grou p, the J ews. a nd in Palestine or Judaea, a provin ce of the Roman Empire. 11 allraCled lilll<" noticl': in the Graeco- Roman world during the early stages of its development. To his contem poraries, J l':sus seems to ha \"t' fi tted till' tradition of prophecy common to all Jews and that of popula r opposilion to the Pharisees , who had rt'tainro a position of poli tical and economic dominance by cooperation wilh the Romans . The earlies t "Gaten, Optrll_nlll,
ro. Kuhn (Leipzig,
1830). t9: 222- 345.
History as Story
77
followers of Jesus were Jews. Their intensely spiritual faith, diverse practice, and messianic expectations produced little in Ihe way of literature besides the Gospels, and even these were written toward the end of the century. At any rate, the Gos~1s were written for the members of the new community; earliest Christianity was a cul turally narrow phenomenon .S!' However, after the Romans destroyed the Jerusalem temple in A.D. 70, which led to the dispersion of many Jews, and after Paul's preaching to the non-Jews, the membership of the tcduiQ came to be increasingly gentile.90 Since the Roman conquest had continued in powt'!r the Grt'!ek dynasty that had rult'!d Judaea for over three centuries, the gentiles converted tended to be Greeks in language and culture, if not in place of national origin . With the influx of Greeks came, of course, the influence of Greek education and culture; and within the new community new kinds of questions came to be raised. The most important questions of the first century had been whether Jews were still obligated by the Law of Moses; but in the second century the most important questions, to witness the Greek influence, were the Gnostic theory of creation, the philosophi c implications of belief in the divinity of J esus, and the (social) acceptability of the Christian cult." The attempt 10 answer these new questions constitutes the beginnings of Christian IileralUre. The second century also saw the beginning of the first distinctively Christian school, the Catechetical School of Alexandria,92 which was • William R. Amokt, "The Rehuioo of Primitive Christianity to Jewish Thought and Teaching," HfJrluud 17tto/~l;rlJl Rtuitw 23 (1930): 161 - 79 . . Jean Dani!lou 's TWogir dll )udIo-ChriJtianulM ( Pari~, 1958) r«,uIlSIrUCU a p~apologetica.l Chri~t.ian theology. Since it is berore the influenee of Helleni~Uc philo$ophiall ideu was felt , it is, he argues. a Semitic. i; ~Jutbeo-C hri,wn~ theology. '10 Since Paul's role in the creation of Chri!!ianity both socially a'ld spiritually i. 10 great, the question or his relation- and that of first century Jew. in general-to the lurrounding society is impol1anl. Edwin A. Judge l"St. Paul and Classical Society," Jdrhd jir All/at M,.d CAn·sulliv," 15 (1972): 19-36J obsel"YCi that the ~dcr rashion of seeing "a sharp dutinction between hebraic and hellenutic rorms or expression" (p. 29) has been undermined recently. Rather than a pre-cxisting oppOllition, he argues, "it W'1 5 the New T estament writers and Paul in particular who (in contrast with the htlltnising spirit of other first centu ry Jews writing in Greek) brought the twO into a radie.al confrontation that was et.'enlually to have great cultural consequences" (p. 30). And he thinks !.hat " If wc knew more about the antecedents of the sophistic rnovtfl'lefll that nourished in the second century, wc might c:ome closer 10 Ihe social selling of Paul's minion" (p. 32). " Massy Hamilton Shepherd {"The Early Apologists and C hristian Worship," fltmW tf ikfiKUJII 18 «(938 ): 60-791 contends Ihat the social th reat polled by C hristianity had 10 do with cult r.l.ther than with belief. '10 Cf. GtlSlave Bardy. ~ Pour rhistoire de rkole d 'Alcxand ric," Vivrt " PttWr 2
76
Uta of Hutor~:~
play a d ecisive ro le in Christian thought tor the next fifteen hun· dred years. By the second centur),. tllI:refore. C hristiani ty had sel forth into the wider world of C raeco·Roman civilization ; and Ihe story of Christianity's influence on Western ci,'ilizalion must begin here. If the first c('ntut)' was one of \'ariety and experiment in C hristian belief and cu lt , the second was 0 0 (" of consolidation and defcnse against both the destruct ive' influence of paga n (or J ewish ) attacks from without and the disi nlcgralivr infiurnce of hrTrsirs from within . The defr ost: against altacks produ('cd th!' apologc'tical li trraturt', which , together ,,",' ilh Ih(' allliht'relicai literalurt', providt' us our first opportunity to obscn '(' Ih(' rerment of Grat"('{)·Roman and C hris tian ideas.'l This raises a hisloriogra phieal probl('m : How is o nc 10 diiT('r('ntiale between Judaeo-Chris tian and Graceo-Roman cnmmunilil:'S. whose uscs of Greek and Latin are to be compart'd ? It is mi .sh~ad ill g to speak of "Greeks," "Romans, " and "Christians." heeaust' thl' Christians were quil(' as muc h Cref!k!l or Romans as W('f(' th(' Syrians. Egyptians, Spaniards, or Gauls who ar(' usually ((lIlsirkrt'd "Gr('('ks" or " Romans" in contrast with th(' "C hrist ians ." Kur should ol1e speak of "Christia ns" and " pagans" or "C('nlil('s." since' both of thl:' latter le rms arc wholl), C hris lian c hara<:u~ ri7.ations and r('prcsC'nt di· c hOlomies foreign 10 Ih (' non-Christian G r('C'k.>; and Roma ns. Tht tcrminological probll'm ha s th(' sam(' origin ill hoth cast·s : Iht' 1:00 ('('1'1 5 (categories) e mplo}'l'd in th inking and wrilin~ ahout lilt' ('u ltural his· tory of latc antiquity, uitimat('ly deri\'('d from thl:' Christian apologists themselves, sen'(' 10 S('1 C hristianit y owr against and in o pposi· tion to everything Greek and Roman, Whil(' Ihis was all n'ry wr\J ror apologctical-that is to sa)" polemical- purpos('s , it j!'; unsa tisfactory for purposes of hi stnriography. "Crc("k, " " Rnma n," or " Gra('coRoman " and "'C hristian " or "Juda t'fI· C hrist ia n" art' not s trictly comparable nr, s lrictly speaking, alternali\'('s. Tlu' rormt'r relrr III something (or someonl' ) primari ly in tC"rms of Ila tinnal. political. grogra. phical, or lingu istic ronsid("rations: th(' lalt('!' primari ly in u: rm s of 10
(1942): 8O-U)9. On Clement'! coneeplion of natbfia,
J
SN' Wpus. ·' Paid t"ia aod Aleuoorinus, ~ I'i,f!i/itl, C1t' ;Jli"',~r 9 ( 1955): 14B-S8:
Pronoia io the Work! or Clemeru on hi$ attitude to the pagan 1tat6da, $l!'r Pirrrc Camrlot, ~ Lcs irlfn tir Clc' men l d' Aluandric sur I'utilisation des sdf'necs rt dr la IillrralUrf' profanr:' R,rI.rffhrJ dr JC1'n ttr ,.li,irrm 2 1 ( 193 1): 38-60. " for a skctch of nrly Christia ni t~· as a ('uh urr , SN' M . Prllf'g rino, " (.a ('u ltu ra erislia na net primi u coli," c.mrimrm, N.S. 1 11954 1: 151- 10.
History as SIOry
79
religious considerations. Moreover, when "Graeco-Roman" is contrasted with "Judaeo-Christian" culture, the problem is compounded; ror while the leading motive or the latter is unquestionably religious, that or the former is not. The entire history or Gr~k and Roman culture evinces an interest in religious matters, but it will not support the claim, or even the implication, that these were matters or special or dominant interest. The Christians were not a group sepa rate or distinct rrom the group called "Greek," "Roman," or "GraccoRoman ." As a historical phenomenon, Christianity arises within Craeco-Roman civilization. Christian uses or Greek and Latin are not-indeed , could not be-in opposition 10 the ordinary uses but , rather, are based on them and developments of them . If Christianity comes to dominate the religious and political institutions or Western civilization and if the Christian world-view comes to supplant that of the Greeks and Romans, it is a conquest not from without but from within . From the outset there is a difference between the ChriSlians' relationship to Cr~k and their relationship to Latin. The language of Christianity in the first century, even in Rome, was Greek; for outside of Palestine. where Greek was the ~cond language of the native population , the Christians were mainly Greek-speaking immigrants. By 150, however, Latin began to come into use although Christians at Rome, such as Justin Martyr, Caius, and Hippolytus, were still writing in G reek throughout the second and early third centuries. By 250 Latin was in the ascendancy . The Christian literature of the first two centuries, which is not extensive, is therefore mostly in Greek . The Christian use of Greek does not differ radically from that of the mainstream of Greek literature of the time. 'ImoQ'o is used by the early Christian writers to refer to che literary genre and, a first use of this mode, " history" as distinguished from other genres. Athenagoras of Athens, trying to show that the pagan gods were on ly men, says, "But even those of the Greeks who are emi nent in poetry and history (o{ 1tEPi. 1toCT)mv 'Kal. lOtop(ov oocpol) say the same thing about H eracles."~ Similarly, C lement of Alexandria, the second head of the Catechetical School, sets out to demonstrate the lack or originality of Creek writers by piling up examples of plagiarism , the unattributed borrowing of lines or passages from earlier writers by later. After giving examples from numerous poets , he proceeds: "Atht:nag. CA,. 29 ( PG 6, 957A).
80
Uta oJ Hutory
"And in ord er that we may see that nOI o nl y philosophy and history, but even rhetoric art': not free of the like failing , it is wt'1I 10 set forth a few instances from Ihem ."
la
ftClem. At. St1l1m. 6.2. 16. "Talia n Ai Cr. 1.1 (PG 6, 804A): alJO 39. 1 (PC 6, BB tD ).
"Clem. AI. SI"m . 1.21.1 01, 122, 147; 6.2.8; PrQ/f. 3.45.1. "Talian Ad Cr. 36.2 ( PC 6, 88(8): 37. 1 (RSOB-(:) . " Ibid. 31.4 (812A) . ... Ibid. 36.2 (880ft).
Hutory as Story
81
celestial bodies (rltv 'trov ).lE't
Hn
82
Uta of HiJto~.,
faith , he says : "Fa ith, therefore, having justified these befofe the law, made t hem hd rs of the divine promise. Why. then , s hould I review and adduce any further testimonies of fa ith from the history in our hand s (ix 'ttl ~ nap' ,,~iv {otoQ(Q~ ) ?" h'; And q uoting Hebr("ws 11 again , he proceeds to argue that faith is the foundati on of all knowledge and su~ri o r to knowledge. It is 11 01 clear whether Clement means by history h CT(, the Epistle 10 lilt' Hcbre ....·s. from which h(' has just ~en citing exa mples of fai th , or Iht" I't"ntatt"uch, from whi ch all of those exa mpl es uhimatrly com('. Whichever is ('orrret. il is inl e T('sting that a wrincn work tha t occupies an ('xaltrd pl act' in the community is said 10 he a history in some sens(', Since. howeve r. it is the only instance in these early materials. there' is lillk 10 infer from it. The verb IoTopElv is used hy t ill' ea rl y C hristian writers in Sl'IlS(!S that are ontin-7J those who lake' part in thl' d i\·il1l' words mu st Ilr 0 11 their guard , lest they engagt." in this as they would in tht." building of cities, inqui ring (l cnoQ~oavu:~ ) only rur the sakr o r curios ity."IOII Similarl y, he d escribes the lipiritual improvement or education: .. And by astronomy, again , raised rro m Ihe ea rth in his mind . he is t'1t'valed a long with heaven. and will ft'volvc wit h its rt-volution . 8t ud ),i ng (lotOQWv) always d ivine things and their harmony wi th t'itch olher.""!!! Most onen , however, the \'('rh means " relatt''' or " record :' Onc or the ways in which C lemen l pursues his attack on Iht' pagan gods is by holding up to rid icule Iht' religious customs of a particular place or people: "And among you tht' Thessa lia ns pay di \'ine hom age to slorks according to the ancient custom : Ihe Thehans 10 weasels 011 account of (their assistanct' at) Ihe birth of Heracles. And again, what about the Th ~sa lian ~? They are reported (tcnOQOUVlUl ) 10 worship ants since they learned that Zeus, putting on the likeness of an anI, had inte rcourse with Eurymcdusa , tht' daughter of ClelOr, IO' Clem . AI. SltO",. 2.4.12-13. (rans . Wilson (A N" ). .. Ibid. 1. 1.6. oM Ibid. 6.10.80.
Histt:ny as Story
83
and begot Myrmidon. And Polemo relates (lO"[OQEt) that the people who inhabit the Troad worship lield-mice."lIo Also indicative of this use are similar accoun ts given about Sparta, Sici ly, Thuria, Phocaea, and Persia. III Clement tells us what is " related " a bout fam ous persons in his argument that G reek philosophy is derived from non-Greeks. "Pythagoras is reported (imOQEl"tQl) to have been a disciple of Soches, the Egyptian archprophet, a nd Plato of Sechnuphi s of Hdiopolis." 112 What is related a bout the gods is used in the First Apology of Justin Martyr to rebut the cl aim that the C hristia n accoun ts a bout J esus are sill y. The immacula te conception, fo r example, is no sillier than wha t is believed a bout Ze us, Mercury, Asclepius, a nd Bacchus. He says : "And wha t kind of deeds are recorded (lmopoil"v(m) of each of the sons of Zeus, it is not necessa ry to tell those who already know." And , he proceeds, even in death J esus was like the sons of Zeus: " For their sufferings at dea th a re recorded (latOQEitm) to have been not alike, but diverse; so that the peculiarity of (His) suffering does not seem to make Him inferior to them ."1!] Th us wha t is believed a bout J esus is no worse tha n wha t is bel ieved about the gods; and, indeed , Justin argues that it is much better. For whereas the accounts of the pagan gods are the products of mythmaking (llu90110U"19d ol) and have no proof, wha t is said a bout J esus is proved by the fulfillm cnt of prophecy. Li t In the Dialogue with T rypho, a literary product of theJewish controversies of the second centu ry, he goes further and claims that the accounts about the sons of Zeus are originall y borrowed from the O ld Testa ment prophecies, saying," . . . and wh en they relate (lmoQWol) that being torn in pieces , and having died, he rose again and ascended to heaven ... do I not perceive th at (se., the Devil ) has imita ted the prophecy a nnounced by the patria rch Jacob and written down by Moses?" II) Clement 100 tells us wh at Panyasis relates (l(J(OQEi) a bout the gods. "' The Christian atlack on polytheism naturall y ex tended to idol worship, since one of the recurrent causes of persecution was that the Christia ns refu sed to pay their respects to the images of the gods or to u' Clcm. AI. i'nIfr. 2.39.6-7, lrans. Wilron (ANF) . '" Ibid. 2.30.H , 38.2; 3.42.4, 6. 8; ~ .65. 1. , 11 C lcm. AI. St rolft . 1.1 5.69; also 1.1 5. 70, 72. ,,, J. M arl. ApoI. 1.2 1 (P G 6, 3608 ); also 1.22 (36 t B). ,I< Ibid. U 3 (405sqq.). 11' J. Mart . mill . 69 (PG 6, 637A), Ira ns. (ANF). l it C lcm. AI. Prolr. 2.35.3, 36.2.
84
Uta
of Histo,y
the Roman emperor's statue. The fourth cha pter of C lement's Exhor. tation to the Grub to Ixocome C hristians exposes the absurdity and shamefuln ess of idol worship by repeatedl y tracing the origins of idols OT cults to particular limes and places ; and ImoQElv is used to indieau: what is "related " abou t these matters. H e 1("lIs us what is " related " by Polt mon about the sta tues a t Athens and by Dionysius abou t the Palladion. m He iIIustrau:s the detrimental innuence of suc h statues by (hI" story of Pygmaiion, as " related " hy Philostepha-
nus a nd Posidippus. m There is a final group of uses of the verb by these early Christ ians which concerns their own religion rather tha n that of their op-
ponents. Properly to undcr5tand Cod sayi ng, " Let us makt' . .. ," says Juslin, ., ) shall aga in relate (L<J'toQliaw) the .....ords spoken by Moses himself.""9 Similarly, C lement , discussing the mrslic meanings of lhe tabernacle and its furniture, contends that then- is ct'rtainl y a hidden meaning in the reference III " the seven circuits arou nd the T emple recorded among th e Hebrews {1tap' 'E!lQa(olt; i<J'toQOU~£vr) ."I.'1 H e also mentions, as an example of tht' henefi ts of t'lIduranct' a nd patience, " Ihe things recorded (t<J'toQOuIlEVa) a hou t Ananias" lll and devotes the second book of tll(' Slromoto to showing that the Greeks fil ched their philosophy from the .Je. . . s. pa ri nf the argument for w~ ich consists in showing tha l " tht'Y ha\'4;' imitated and copied the marvels recorded (l(JtOQOUIlEVWV ) among US."IU Finally, Justin tells us that "Sodom and Gomorra h are recorded hy Most's ,lmopoUvtal U1I0 MwaEw~ ) to have been citi es of impious mr.n ,"I'H There are only a few oc(Urrcnccs of tll(' adjecli\'(' [moQu(6~ in these materials. Cle mcllI refers to tht" " historia ns" s('nra l times.11 1 Tatia n begins his argument that "our phi losophy" is older than that of the C rceks by saying, " Most's and Homer shall be nur limilS since they are very ancient; Ih e one is the oldes t uf' lhr poets and historians (l(JtOPlXWV), and the other tht' founder of a ll barbarian wisdom. "12.~ Moses, the writt=r of tht= O ld Testament. is Ihus both poet and his'" Ibid. 4.36.H. 47.6; d . 4.. 7.2.
48,2, 54.3; III Ibid. 4.57.3, I~ns . Wilson (A.' ·f) . lit J. Man . Dial. 62 (PG 6. 6 178). 171 Clcm . AI. SI,I7I'II. 5.6.32.
and
:H 5.3.
Ihid. 2.20.103. Ibid. 2.1.1 . 171 J . Man. Ap.i. 1.53 ( Pe 6, 4088 ). I,. Clcm. AI. SI1O"'. 1.21.142; 6.2.24. and 26 (latOQloyQ6:4K>; ). 111
In
" ~
Tatian Ai GT. 3 1 (PC; 6. 869A).
History as Story
85
torian, and is set up as having the same cultural stature in the Jewish and Ch ristian world as Homer has in the Greek and Roman world . Furthermore, according to Clement, his philosophy is in part "historical" or "historylike." For he writes: "The Mosaic philosophy is accordingly divided into four paris-into the historic (,to latOQlxCrv) and that which is specially called the legislative , which two properly belong 10 an ethical treatise; and the third, that which re lates to sacrifice, which belongs to the physical science; and fourth , above all , theology ." 126 The earliest Christian use of Latin parallels the use of the Greek terms both in meanings and in contexts of use. Sometimes "history" indicates a written work, as when Tertullian recounts the visit of Pompey to the Jerusalem temple, on the authority of Tacitus "in the fifth book of his Historiu {in quinla Hisloriarum suar1lm )." 111 More often, however, at least for Tertullian, "history" refers to an informational account as such rather than as a literary product. The subjects of such an account vary. In the old se nse of natural history, he menlions a history of dreams (Izistoria somnium ) in five volumes by Hermippus of Berytus, 1211 and , rejecting someone's evidence of a transmigration of souls, he suggests that the account may have been found "in some very obscure histories (in hiJton·j5 aliquibus occullioribu.5 )."'2'J Tertullian uses "history" in reference to social events when he replies to the charge that the Christians arc the cause of certain public disasters by pointing out that there were plenty of such disasters before Christianity bt=gan . " Where were the Christians, then, when the Roman state furnished so many histories of its disasters (tot kistorias (aho rum 5uofllm) ?"11O And he seems to use " history" as the past in his demonstration that Moses is of greater antiquity than Homer: " we must look into the history and literatu re of the world (in his/ona5 tI litterQJ orbis) ."UI We also find Tertullian using "history" as story . Against the attacks on Christianity, he argues that what is said about the gods by those who accept them vilifies them : " Is not their majesty violated , C lem. AI. Strtnrt. 1.28. J 76. t11Ttrt. Apel. 16.3 ( PI 1, 364); also AJIoI. 19.2 (383); Ad MIl . 1.1 J (CSEL 20.80, 25-26); and Min. rei. Ocl. 21. tIlTc:n . D,A". 46 (CSEL 20.377, 13-16). tK
I" Ibid . 28 (348, 4-5) . I-TeTl . Ad Ngl. 1.9 (CSEf. 20. 73, 15-16). no Ten . AfNJI. 19.7 (PL 1,388).
86
Idea of Hulory
their deity defiled by your plaudilS? But you really are still more religious in the amphitheatrr , where over human blood , over the dirt of pollution or capital punishment, your gods dance, supplyi ng themes and stories (argummta tl his/orias) for the guih)'- unless it is that often the guilty play the parts oflhe gods."1'I1 Again, in attacking the Roman spectacles, he:: contends Ihal the ans and art works arc products of the daemons: .. ..'or oonr but themselves would have made provision and preparation for Ihe objects they had in view; nor would they have given tht" a rts to the world by any but those in whose names and images and stories (hi.Jloriis ) they S(' t up for their own e nds the artifice of consf'cralion ."HI Similarly, the heres)' or Valenlinus is said 10 be concerned wilh " the stories (his/orills ) and Mil esia n rabies or their own A("ons." I:1I finall y, both Tenullian and Minucius Felix use historicru substantively as " his torian ."I !; These Greek and Latin uses or " history" by Iht' C hristian writers or the first two centuries art", aside rrom the predominance or religious subjects. not extraordinary. In some instances they invoke the dis tinctions among literary ~enres that Wf'rt" c urrent in the Greek and Roman thought or t h(" lim('. While th('y usr the distinction, they do nOI make it, Ihal is, they do nOI state nor do they ev;nct' any interest in the grounds C)r delails of Ihe distinction . This leatuT(' or their uses '
Irans. {;)m·t' 11.oth!. :Id .....",. 1.10 {(;~i£l. :ZU.80. '>-9). it ~Isa~t t itM in Iht ItXl . .'\h hou~h Iht' pair,
atlllosl l'f,blll;", idefllit al with (ht
tJrAII"""hlml hiJIO';II. ha\·t:l prior his(ory ofUH' ,u t I ) a d islinl'lion he\wrt'n 11-\'0 s ptcits nflht Rt'lI uS 1111"11/;1'11 or "Imlllzo and a~ (1) dislin('1 parll in tht' n:lI1SlrIL{,lion ofa It'!l:al ('ase, Ihole mol"(' lor-mal aud rigorous USM art htrt lran_~ltrrtd 10 lht domain of pot'. Iry . Thus Uo lmu (,1.\'1-) Iranlialt's " p,onr "nd plot ." " ' Tw . Jp«. 10 (('SE I. 'lO. I:t. 14- 111. AI ..10' Sa l. 'L I (95. 5-HI ht' ash. h a ,htIOfic alllu~lion . wht' lher wt oURht t" 1M'lit'H in .. gud whom " hislory has Ihrown IltiJ/11"11 ,lIr/IIZ'II ) OIl liS." In Ihe pre('l'dinR p;"lr .... graph ht' ha.<; lislt'd a nd dts<'ribtd hrit'fly th(' I h rt'f' sorts o r .~od~ \ ."rno ,I iSIiIlI{uidH·d. " Ih .. jlh ~ ,iral rlass. of' which till' philosophl' n trl':lI, th(' mylhk rla 5s. wh tf h is Ihe ," ""Ialll huntl'1l uf Ihl' poneu. ann Iht g~nlilt class. ",hir h ,hr "at; nn ~ ha\'<' ;,dulllnl ""r h "UI" I" r iut' I[" P;"lrattelisms o r coMl r u{'liun SU.ll:!,:I"SI Iha t hit/Mi" rd"r~ I{I lht sl"{'und dass. thal ,,1' Iht' """IS. and should Ihl'rrrure acr o rd iull.ly h.. Ir: ms blni "~Iur~ . " Ruhrrl Dirk Sinr r ["Trrtul1ian. 0 .. /h, .'iIwu'J: ..\ n ..\ " ,d ~·_.i_, . " ./olll1lal "I n"v/"Kitlll SI"di, . n.s. ,!!I I I !1711 ) : 3~!I--G5! ~ 'lIIIutS Ihat th r da ssical rh,· t"rk al pri""'plr. "f ' ·' ""I-,,,, ili..,, Mr lit .. l,· ~~ ",,' "HI ~ t" 'hr I:III,11;u a llllt'. hut Oils" I" ,h.. , h.. "I,,!:~ " I Trrlullia" S .... " I"" hi." .. S, .... t·tu ..· a nd !)c' Mgn in lht' ' Ik rrSUrrl"l'li OIll' ... uorum' ,,1' ·!',·rlullia.n. I Zlf.tfint c:ltml ,,,"u, 13 ( I 9!ill1: I i 7-9ti a nd .·III'-;"~I RIt,If/,ir mill/it, :1rt '!f Tr£1. :to.:!:II;. 1+-IIH. " . Te n . ,.\pal. I!I.-I I PI. 1.:1117 \: :\Ii .. . 1'.. 1.0( /. 1 1. / . "\ K;.ius ~ 11,.. d" im Ih:" Ihr .·IpofoX"""'" i, 311 r l' id .. k li, · ' IK:rt: h. I.. ",, ~ .I . S"'iIl " rp;u n l " r"l".. n.• k Rhr! o.k in Tnlu llian 's .Ipofoxrl /(II"' ." l AM",,, . 1 7 , 1' 1:-,111 ·IItH- n I I hat ;1 i_" a I; ... ~n_
U.,
M
History as Story
87
of the Gr~k and Latin words is merely an instance of the general character of the relationship between Christian and Graeco-Roman thought as it is revealed in these early materials: the Christians are using. but not participating in. Graeco-Roman culture. TIH~y use the languages, adopt <:enain of tht! litemry fmms, and borro\\' scientilic ur philosophic terms and distinctions; but their aim is not to understand or teach the language, to produce literary work! that will provide pleasure to their readers, or to criticize in order to offer a more comprehensive or conclusive science or philosophy . Their purposes are apologetic, polemical, and persuasive. This reveals perhaps tht: most distinctive feature ohhe early Christian usage: their context is apologetic, polemical , and ~rsuasive . These words occur in the midst of defcnses against a uack, counter-attacks, and exhortations to conversion. Nearly all of the occurrences that have been examined fall under onc offour eommonplaces of early Christian literature: ( 1) thatJewish (and hence Christian) culture is more ancient than Graeeo-Roman; ( 2) that J ewish (and hence C hristian) culture is better (i .e., more original, more national , more mora l) than Graeco-Roman; (3) that the pagan gods wen: mere mortals, and not divine; and (4) that the beliefs about the gods and the forms of worship of them are absurd and/or immoral. What is distinctive about the early C hristian idea of history , then, is not any special or new significance attributed to it but, rather, the persuasive context of its use. Considering the social circumstances in which this earliest Christian literature is produced and the educational and cultural circumstances of the writers, this does not seem odd ; for this literature was occasioned by attacks rrom without and within. It should be recalled that of the six writers with whose works we have been concerned so far, five--Clement , Justin Martyr, Tatian , Minucius Fe!ix, and Tertullian- were brought up in the non-C hristian society and given the predominantly rhetorical education that was characteristic of that age. Of these five , only Clement, before he b<:came ChriSlian, seems not to have practiced the vocation of rh etor, preferring the life ofschoJarship and tt!'...ching . ' ~ Both Minucius Felix and T e rtullian wel"e practiring lawyers, aIld the latte r seems to ha"c ubtained sume eminence in Roman law.
Eyen C lement, in CQntrast with Origen, is a polemicist, according to Jaeger, bIg Cltrnt;/Ulit.J (I"J Gr,," Paid,;a (Cambridge: Harvard Uniyersity Preu , 1961) , Chp. S. I .•
v The Distinction between Sacred and Profane History in Late Antiquity
I
T HAS LONC BEEN THE CONSENSUS of Wes l e:rn
scholars that
a pro-
found transformation of the ancient world ~gan in the third century. Since Gibbon it has been customary to refer to this as the "crisis of the third century" and to the complete transformation as "the decline and fall of the Roman Empire," although, far from disappearing, the empire survived anOlher thousand years, albeit cenleTed in Byzantium and although the social and economic problems of the third century had a marked effect on the very formation of the Byzantine Slate.' The second century saw the highes t development of the imperial system; it was a time, relatively, of peace and prosperity, and the age of the "good empcroTS"-Hadrian, Trajan, Antonius Pius, Marcus Aurelius. However, the reign of Commodus ( 180-93), the son of Marcus Aurelius, was followed by a hundred yea rs of wars, civil dis· order, soldier·emperors, and disintegration of the em pire into provin . cial army·factions. War, plague, and famine thinned the population and laid waste the land ; as cities and towns decayed , commerce d e· clin«l and tax revenues dwindled . Tht! unt!asy toleration that had • f Qr S()ffie rC1:C1l1 discussions Qf the qUClIKm. s« MQrlimer C hambers, ~ Thc C ri sis of,he Third Cemury," in T/w TraJU/mn6tiOfl ofth ROfIIIIII Wort', cd . Lynn While ( Ber. kcley: Un iversity Qf C alifornia p~u, 1966); rh FilII of R~mt: Q.II If B~ £",ptaill~,{! ~ . MQrlimer Chambcn (New York: Hoh, Rineharl a nd Win.ston, 1967) ; Andrus AJffildi, Sftltiitfl <:" r Gtultid/ff 4tT WdfkriSf tits 3. JaifrltulI'"ts (DarmM"dl : WiSSCn!chaft· lithe Buchgesellschart, 1967) ,
90
/din ol . lliJ"lor. )'
been accorded all fon' igll ('ullS gan' way, wit h inu'rn,,1 Sl rrss. 10 JX'r· sccu l;on of the Ch ri stians i,,'rr (Ilia tor (-;\';1 disobedi('ll c(". T he decli ne of the cent ral au thorit y n'adH'd ils pt'ak unde r G allic ll us (260- 68) ; Aurd ian (270- 75) rt' s torl'(! tl f(IN and hegall a for lifkat ifl ll of the empin' against ha r barian (' ll nOaC hm l' llts. which was cnmplf'l('d hy I)ioclrlian (284- 305) . D ioclc ti all also aw' mpt<.'d 111 sl al>il ll',(' lht' goq' rnment and to makt· the im pt' ria\ ad minist ration more r mc;rnl. All trace's Ilf n:publican islll fina ll y ,";w is hl'd; tht, emperor was lh t, absolu u' rukr. In add ition. thrrt' was it slron .,\: H' ndcllcy 1U !t'\"(' ling of older loca l a nd nationa l di stinctions. pri\"ill',I!:t'S. a nd lihcrt ies: It aly and Ro me onk iall y ht'(',m lt' prorinrrs a m ullf..( pwvinn 's, I)i odl, ti a n '~ alxl ieation was 1;,1[11\\'1,<1 hy llill(' U' I'U yt'ars of str u~!{ I l's alllO Il~ his " (n ll ('agu~s, " From t h('s(' s lr U)(~ I ('S (: ulI S(a 11l im ' I' nl(' r~('d as solc ruler, C hris ti ani lY as tllf' Slal(' rrl iginll , a lld Byza ntiulll , nuw ca ll ed Cunsta nlint"s poli.l- C onsta nli tIUpi r -as II, t, 111' \\' ~api l a l (If l Ilt' (' 111 pi n', T ht' la ll('r P,I\'ro tilt' \\'ay li ,r Ihl' srpa ratillll of East a nd WCS I. which was consu mmalt'ci in :S6-1 wilh th(' making of \" a klll inian c mperor of Iht' \\"('st. Vaklls t'mpt' ror "f tilt' Eas t. T hus wha t had ill ways bt:cn thouRhl of as lIlt" h('a rtland of lilt' Ruman Enlpirf'-Spain, Gau l, and Ila ly- C"Uuld fa ll to Ih(' harharia ns in t ht' li ft h ("(' Il lu ry , while yet " the (' m pin '" sUl"\'i \"l'd , The decl ine in Ih(' c ultura l trad ition of G r('c('e and Rom(' was alreadv noted !J\' T ari tus in Ih(' s('t'und l"('n IU f\'. , Th c irn ita ti \'clless and . . triviality of m uch of later im p<'riill li lt"ra tu n ' may h(' a ll ribulr d in part 10 the dt"ciinr ill thl' im pnrta nl'(' flf n llllllllL nil y lilr thoU characterius the period, il nd in parI to lh(' ull;vI' rsa l i llllul~ lI..:t' of rlWlOric in t"dU{:al iul1 ami IC Il f' rs, aln'ady Iln lf'd in ('onlU'C'lion with thf' ea rl y ('mpire , Wh al li lrra tu r(' tiu're was, was rhrlorlra l. a nd imd l('C lu al (' 11('rgy produced i l ,~ mus t e rcal;\'!' r('suits in \'umnlt'lltari('s 011 Ill(' all cient mast('rs, Likr the literary Irad ition , lite trad ilion of math('ma tics a nd naw ral scicnc(' a lso dcdi lwd Ihr(Ht~ h lack of crcat ive fo rc{' and loss of a ll confide nce ill t h(' dli ntcy of r('ason , Simil a rl y, phi losoph y expend('d its ('Ile r!(it's 1111 (')(honali nns In mora l condun . commt'nta rit's on t"ar li ~r p hilosophrTS, fi r wurking uul Ih(' (It'tai ls ofa Pl atonic Ihc.ology, By Ihe fo urth cen tu ry Ihl' C hristia ns a lrt'ady IU'ld the leade rship of Ihe ilU ('lIrCl ua l \\'(lrld , Fur th('s(' r('asons, and ht·cause of the act ual pa ucity nl' 1111' lite ra ry rr ma ins, onl y it hri<-f ('xaminat ion of non-C hristian C r('('k and Roma n usage s('('ms in ord t'r h('fore proceedi ng In Iht' C hris tia n ascrnda ncy ,
Sacred and Profone History
91
In the Latin writings of the later empire [he shifts in usage already noted a re continued : from history as a li tera ry gen re to his tory as an account per se and the decline of the accuracy or factuali ty implied in the use of the word . Historia is still used to ind ica te the literary genre;2 it is dis tin guished from other literary genres,' certain rules a re laid down,' and the word is also used to indicate particular works, instances of the genre " history."5 But historia is more ofte n used in its ot her mode as the facts or a factual account about somethi ng, emphasizing the content ra ther th an the literary form . The su bjects of history in this sense may be natural thi ngs ,' social and political events,' a nd , in the grammatical tradi tion, fo llowing Dionysius Thrax , inform a tion in generaJ.' More oft en, however, the subjects of history are gods and heroes; thus hi story as Story , Servius, the commentator on Vergil , fo r example, noting the disagreement a mong Cato, Va rro, and Oiomedes a bout the arrival of Anchises in Ital y, remarks, "such is the variety and confusion of stories (hi.rtoriarwm ) a mong them.'" Pomponius Porphyria, a commentator on Horace, onen ex plains obscu re points by invoking the known story (nota historia) of a god or hero, a nd he a pplauds Pindar as a singer of new stories (novas historias) in dit hyrambs." That the use of historia no longer implies the accuracy, fa ctuality, or truth of the ma tt er is furth er suggested b)' Servius' use of otra h.istoria, a true story,lI reminder of a simila r use by Aulus Cellius. If the uses of historio indicate the persistence of change from the earlier to the later empire, the adjecti ve historicus does not ex hi bi t a similar continuity of developm ent. For the most pa rt it is now used subslantively to indica te a historian , thus retaini ng its intima te canI Sen.·. A,II_ 1.443; Porphyria CII"". 2.1 .17; Mar!. Cap. 5.526. I Auson. 5.20. 7~ ; 21.25- 26; 26. 1-4 ; 18. 10.2 1- 22; Man . Ca p. 5 ..s~; S~n.· . AtII. 1.]73, 382. • E.g., Amm. Marc. 27.2.11; 26. 1.1 ; t·OrlUIl. Rhtl. pp. 83, 10-13; 84. 14--20; M art. C ap. 5.55 1-52; Serv. A(Ir. 9.742. ) E.g., Am m . M art:. 24.2. 16; Dar. Phryg. T,II. pp. I , I"'; Diom. Grll"'", . 1 (1,34 1, 4); Porphyrio Cann . 2.1.1 ; SUM . 1. 1.1 0 1- 2; V~el . Mil. 1.8; 4.28. t Scn·. Arll . 2. 15; 3.76. , Ausoll. 20. 15.69; Porphyrio Caf/ll . 2. 1.1 0, 12. 1; St"". 2.1.l.J . • Diom. Gf/l","'. 2 (1. 426, 18- 26); 3 (1.482, 11 ); Domu. V. 1'" .(. 19 1- 99. f &rv. Aell. 4.427; cf. 1.1 68, 487; Auson. I :t. 10; Macrob. Sal. 1.6A; Porp hydo Cann . 3. 19. 10 Porp hyrio Ca nn . 1.6.8; 3.7. 16; 19. 1-3; 4.2. 10; 7.27- 28; Ep . 3.9- 10, 17.!I. 11 S~rv . AIII"I. Ani. 1.6~1 ; cf. Scrv. Am. 1.526 and Auson . 19.76.1--4 .
92
ltitQ
of Hi.fto~,
nection with hislOTY as a lit erary genre.!! 11 is a lso used 3m ibutin:ly, 0 11 occasion , as "factual. "Il In the Gree k writings of Intt' antiquity the occu rre nces of [OlOQElV a nd lmoQ,a arc lound mostly in the liH~ra t u rt' of commentary a nd
doxography. Th ey reOccI Ih t" pecu liar concern of Ihal literatu re, a nd perhaps of that ag(, gem-rally, to hand down and explicate the tho ught of the old masters. T he verb is still occasionally USt-d in ils old es t se nse, " 10 inquirt","1I but mort: frequently in ils lalest ~t"nse. as what is ·'related." This may be events,1l nat ura l phenomena ,'" well-known persons, 1' or the gods;" but usua lly il has 10 d o wilh opinions. I" carrying on a use first found in the wrili ngs of Plularch. St'xtus Empiri cus. and Epi ctetus. The noun is occasionally us<"o as .. li t<"rary .....o rk .··' hut rOf Ih (" most part a " h istory" is an info rmational accoun t Of inlo rma tion. It is su used hy Alexander of Av h nx t isia.~. knuwn :l'i 1-.\:1'1(1'11'.•. onc: ur Iht' most "oluminous u f the ' IlIr i(!nI (HllIllle lllalo)"s UIl Aristot lt, and rertainh' the Illost impo nam fu!' the SHhSCI.tHCIlI 11":lIlilioll . Ht' ohs~ r\'t's Ihal. 011 Arislutit"s ,·jell". "both facls am i hi.~ I OI"it'S (at jUllhiuu~ Tt: Kai. {mopuu)" a rt' dt'rin.'d especially fru ll1 h cari ll~ , whe rt',ls klluwlt'c i,!{t' (hn(TT"11J.1.1)) WIIlt'S espt'ciall~' fi'on! ,·isi()Il. ~" And h('rt' ag";lin , the old IIPIJ',.~ iljoll hel \I·t't'1I history and I'< lIil111011 or {'OIlIell1pia tiw kllo wlt'e1!{t' is St't'II . On tht' olht'r hanel . I.unblichus. lhe 1'\c..'tlplaleJl lisl. ("(IIU"ISIS UrTop(o:t with 8&yJ.l.QTa. illlc.mlling us that (as<:".li 01 lile :lfit'l" cit'it,h .m .' knowll from hOlh kinds of E.g .. " mm. MarC". 11. 10.6; 23.4 . 10: :\ UJOII . 18.5A 1- 42; :\1aC"rob. S.I . 5.14 . 11 ; !kn·...1..... 7.678; 8.190; l \ufl . ..1/11. IA I: 3.33.; \ ·rgrl. .IW. I.pratl: 11 E . ~ ...",uson . 12.2.4: I) iom . (;'11","' . 1 ( 1.«0. 21. :1 (\ .482. 3 1 sqq.l: Srr\". ."",rl . .·' rll . 9.144. ".",rl. P/(ll. t Dirb. f)(; 307a4-8 1; :\I ~Jt .."'ph . 111 .I/rlr .. VP. 40. 13- 24: :i1. i--8: /11 Stili .• p. 4. 13- 17. I'. O lymp. I" :lIr .• pp. lr.7. 23-14 : 15.S. 16-17; 1.\-1. !1_ lU l'itin j,l Xr u. un thr Pr rsian It
It/llbEC/l .
.. A!ex. '·'Vh. In .\11'11'.• PI" :11 . 1 1- 22: :Ii. ;...9: I H .li/ ,.. .. p. i!!.~ : Olm,p. IH .-4 /r .. p. 2 111. 14-- 1 ~; !'md. In (;0111 .• p. :14. 24. 11 lamb. I'P. pp. I\. 3; 22. 4: 23. 9; 2'>. 11; 41. 12; 68. 13: 99. 7; 105. 12; 106. 11 ; 136. 13: Ilorph. 1". Pyllr . 6 1 Ip. 52, 7- !1\. 55 Ip. 47, 20- 22 1. I. Porph. V. P"~I~ . 2 ( UI. 10- 12) . 1- E.g .• Alu. Aph. 11I Mdllplr .. pp. 51. 11: 52. 10; 11U, I. 6. 15- 17; Ol ynlp. III tI(t ., pp. 43. 12; SO. 8: Porph. r. p..rllt. 44 140. 20- 23); Simp. lit Cad. 51On41 ; /" PII.,. r. 2Y 16 l Dirb. 0(; 483. H- IO) . ... E.!I., Porph . !h l' . 1 tp. -"S. 14- tlH: r . P'1~1r . .') Ip. t!l. t.'- l il . .., III &"J .. p. 12.6- 10.
Satrtd and Pro/mu H istmy
93
source.~l
'laTOpCa may also indiC' . , even within Ihe Peripatetic School, is dearly iIIuslrated by this passage. Aristotle refe rred 10 his inquiry as rile; ,¥uxilc;: l(J'[oQ£a, that is, the fa cts or a factual account about the soul (Dt An. 1.1) ; and he began it by a review of the opinions of his predecessors (taS tooV 1tQOTEQWV b6l;ae;). As Themistius understands it, however- and he is writing a para phrase, not a commentary or an exposi tion- what is sought is knowledge or und erstanding (9EOlQElV) about the soul , and one is to begin by examining the "history" of previous opinions. Fo r Aristotle, the history was a first-order sort of knowledge, the facts about the subject matter; for Themistius, the history is a second-order sort of know ledge, the facts about previous opinions about the subject matter. Similarly Aetius tells us the opinions of the Pythagoreans and of Philip of Opus about the earth and th e counter-earth "according to the Aristotelian histo ry (' AQIO"tOTi.A.ElOV latoQLav) .$ And Alexander of Aphrodisias repeatedly uses lcnoQ(a to indi cate Aristotle's accounts of the opinions of his pred ecessors .1 1 The third century of Christianity within the Roma n Empire was one of intermittent persecution except for (he offici al suppress io n U liP, p. 30, 1S- 16. U E.g., Alcll. Aph. 11. -'ltlt., pp. 32, 11 - 18; 57, 2-3, 25--28; I" &"1., p. 4, 13- 17; lamb. fP, p. 66, 9-12; Simp. io Dicls, DC, pp. 480, 7; 483, 9. ti E.g., lamb. liP, p. 169,5; Porph. AltJ'. 1.25 (p. t02, 7- 10). » 1. hA • . , p . 14, 4--6. " Diets, DC 360b l -5. rI I::.g., 1ft Mttylt ., pp. 9, 6; 16, 18; 23, 12; 41 , 17; 42, 25; 50, 1:1.
94
Uta
of H istory
under Dccius (250-5 1). The empire was ha\'ing its difficult ies , a nd it was easy enough to blame both natural and social di sasters on the growing movement , which n eith ~r bel ieved in nor paid homage t Q the ancient gods. In 303. under Dioclet ian . though rvidently a t the insistence of Galerius, the Grea t Persecution began . It continued after Dioclctian 's abdication until 31 J when Galerius, from his dea th bed, grant ed tolera tion . The power struggles Ihat dom inated the beginning of the fourth century ended with Consta ntinc 's victory o\'l~r fI..fa xcnt ius at the Mih'ian Hridge ill 3 12. Tht" \'ictory was won under the sign of the cross, which Conslanlinr adoptl!d . according to Eus('bius, aller th e appearance ora naming cross in the noonda y sky with the legend tv TOlh.:p Vt'KQ, in this you s hall conq uer. It is a contra· \,crtoo quest ion whether Consla nt ine himselr act ua ll y converted. to C hristianity,tH but in 313 he issued an edi ct at Milan decreeing tol· eration for C hristianity throughout the empire, and he later es tab· lished C hristianit ), as the ofli cial religion or the empire and moved the imperial capi ta l rrom Rome to Byzanlium , now christened Con· stan tinople. Although pagan sym bols continued to apJX=ar on imperial monu ments and coins, C hristianity was hencerort h the dominant cultural and religiOUS rorce . The pagan reviva l undef the a postate Julian did not survive him. ~'" The problems confronting the tcdtSia in late antiquity were both old and new. Responding to attempts to blame the Ch risti ans for social problems, the apologetical literature of the third , rourth , a nd firth centuries is extensive, and makes substantially the sa me attacks on the popular cults as had lhe earlier apologies . I n the con tinuing di scussion about the proper way to interpret the Sacred Scriptures, the aliegorical method of the Alexandrian School was opposed by the li teral (or historical ) exegesis or the Antiochene School in the works or its greates t representatives, Diodorus of Ta rs us. Theodore of Mop· suestia, J ohn Chrysoslom , and Thcodoretus of C}' r us . ·~1 And finally ,
• In TIlt u nt'l'"ioll ojCOIII/Gllfill' , ed. J onn W. t:die (New Yo rk : Iloh, Rinehan aoo Win"on, 1971) thrff distinct possible imerprelattoOl arc offered-( I) tha t he W.1.$ merely a political pragmatist, (2) tha t he was a pagan syncrctisl, aoo (l l Ihat he WaJ a ge nuine C hristian convert-as well as a synthnis of all three. " O n Julian 's use of educatton 10 promote Ihis re\'i\'al, see Glan\'j]Je I)owne~·. "The Emperor J ulian and the Schools," Cl 53 ( 1957): 97- 103. III On An t;och itself and its role in the cultura l hisIOf)· of the ancien t world, 1« Glanvilk Downey, TM lIiJ/tlr.J of .-h/iN" ( Princelon: Princrlon Uni\'enil)· Pr65, 196 1) and An/iMA- ill IA-t A6t of 17ttodosilU (Norman, O kl a.: Universi ty of O klahoma Preu,
Sacral and Pro/ant History
95
with the es tablishment of Christianity as the official religion or the empire. doctrinal and liturgical regularity, always ecclesiastically dt"'sirahle. became politically imperative. Constamine him self presid ed over the first ecumenical convention of the Christian church, the Council of Nicaea, in 325. And the antiheretical literature of the fourth and fifth centurics cspecially is immense. It has already been observed that the language of C hrist ianity in the first and second centuries was Greek , even in the \Vest, and that Latin ca me into its own in the third century. The C hristian domain then began to mirror what was happen ing politically and culturally in the wider domain of the Roman Empire, namel y, the growing estrangement of EaSl and Wes t. The Christian linguist ic area divided into Wes tern (Latin -spea king) and Eas tern (Greek-speaking ) blocs, which developed rather differentl y." Since the Greek tradition is beginning to be separated from the Latin , and since it is this Latin 1962). On the School of Antioch. be$idel the general remar ks in th r discussi()J1$ Qf pankular fi gures in the PatrolQgies Qf Ahaner and QUa5I("n , $t(" the hi$lorieal, dt· scriplive, and doctrinal profile (and basic bibliography) in Ihe Dit"fillllnlli,t d, TlrifJlllfi, Cllfllf1iiqllt (Parh: Lc:tou1:ey. I 699- t9!)()) , I: 1435- 39. art icle " Amioche (Eeolt TheoJogique d ') .'· It is generall)· conceded Ihal there wu a substan lial Opposilion belwttn Aleundrian and Anliochenc exegesis; e.g., A. Palmicri. " Alexandrian MyS licism and the M yst iC! of Christian VirginiI Y." Am. Clltll . QI,ry. R,t. 41 ( 19 16): 390-405. 81.11, 10 Ihe conlrar)", j acques Guillel. ~ Les hcp;esC"1 d ' Ab;andrie el d ' Antioche. ConOit 01.1 m alentendu r' R«ltmlltJ de Jri~ltC( rtiix ituJ( 34 ( 194 7): 257-302. and Hen ri de Lu Uac, .. 'Typologic' ct ·Allegorisme·... ibid. 34 ( 1947): 180- 226. On the later fortunes of the Antiochcnc method, sec M. L. W. Laislner, " Antioc hene Exegesis in Wel tern Europe during the M iddle Ages," H am Thlt/f. RlV. 40 (1947) : 19- 31 , and Beryl Small!:)', nt 51114.1 ~ fill BiIJI( ill lilt .\ridd{, Agu , 2nd w . (O xford, 1952). "See CUllaloe Ba rd y, lA f UtJ/i,," dts 11l"IWtl dtJu I'iglist tJltC,tll1V (Paris, 1946). It has been shown, a t IelJ t aooul Lal in, tha t Ihe language of th e C I.rislians differed sufficiently from Ihe rontempora nrous non-Chri5lian language to juslify speaking of a "Christia n Latin la nguage." The early comention was Schrijnen's. Einar 1.0f51ed t {S)III4CliclI (Lund, 1933) , pp. 458If.J noted the gradualness of the tr,uuition 10 a Chris_ tia n La tin and argued that it WIJ a matter mo re often of transformations than of neologisms. The thesis was most thoro ugh ly txplored and dOCumtnled in the numerous nudies of Christille Mohrman n. The stale of the discussion as ..·ell as in prior hislol")· was well.summari:r.ed by j . de Ghellinck , " Latin ehn!tien 01.1 langue laL ine del chrttW!IlS," Lts tluMJ Ctamqun 8 {1939):449-78J, ",·ho n!mai~ u ncOIwinoed. By 1946 Mohm lallll '-Quelque5 Irail5 c.aract~risliques d u utin des C hr~liell 1.·· M il( l/{Utll (,"lIfilf1lll; M'fflfti (Vatican Cil),. 19#1), p. 437J considered that Ihe exi51ence of the special language was alread)· eSlablished, and proceeded 10 oUlline and documrnl some of lhe !ra ilS of tha l speeial language. Numerou ~ shon s tudiu ...·iII tx: found in her thldn fu r It latin del chrhinu. 2nd ed. (Rome, 19( 1). Abo:soee Ihe bibliognphy in jean ~si~. ~~io~it.u la fonKUt latiN, 18110-19-48 ( P".. ris: Bel~ uures. 1951). - uuinc: ch rttlCn. pp. S J-~2.
96
Idta
of Hislo~"
t radition that constitutes the substam:t: of the C hristian intell ectua l inherita nce orthe Midd le A,l{cs, the Creek C hristian writers might be the firs t to consider. The use of lOlOQElV hy the C hristian writers of late antiq uity is nOI extensi ve . While it is distri hu tf'd. hroadl y speaking. into the same maj or groups as pr('viously ( i.f" .. to inquire and to record ) C hristian usage follows non· C hristian in making the former "irtually ubsoiet(' , Not surprisingly, nearly a ll of ,he uses of the \"(Tb either directly o r
ind irectly relat e 10 things C hristia n. ' lotOQElV sometimes means 10 inquire into natural th ings. Theodoretus of Cyrus, t he las\ rrprese ntat iv(" of t he Antiochene School during it s mos l t readw' pt'riod . demo nstratcs the cxistence of Divine Providence from, among other things, lhe cons truction of the human body; a nd in particul a r th(' pro(,('!lS of rt'spiration, "as t hose who have inquired ( {O'toQi)oavtE~ ) irll n s uch things clusely say," lt'ads us to sce this.!1 ' IO"tOQElV as It' arnill ~ hy inquiry into niltural things is fou nd in Basil the Great , the fi rst of th (' threl' cmi nellt Ca ppadoda n Fathers. He s hows us various ways in which . as God saw, \\'atcr is good, among which is that "olicn it springs ('"\"t'n from mines tltat it h as crossed, deriving wa rmth fmm th ~ rn. and ris('s ho iling, and hursts forth of a hu rning hea l. as may he It'arne-d by inquiry (f;EO'tlV lOlOQi)OUl) abou t islands and cU
416. 14- 16}.
Samd and Prtifant Hi/to?
97
cults shows that they are false; and he cites numerous exa mples, of which onc is that, "as those who have inquired (01 LOtOe"OavtE~ ) explain ," the Pelasgians learned the names of the gods from the Egyptians but do not worship the same gods as the Egyptian s. Among the earliest historians of the new com mun ity, totOQEtv is also used in the very ancient sense of firsthand visual inquiring, al· most equivalent to seeing. Gelasius, for example, ust:s it about natu· ral things and socia l customs .U But more often it has to do with social and political events. Thus Eusebius tells us that he "was present and observed (tmOQi)ool'tv)" C hristians being tortured and beheaded ,l6 and that he " was present and saw (u naQ
a.
n~ l as . H.E. 2.17.29-30; 3.9.4; [us. H .E. 7. 18 (PG 20, 680C-D ). • [us. H.E. 8.9 (PG 20, 7608 ). t:us, Or. ~'"t. 16 (ces ' . 176, 30-177, 4).
'I
" Ibid. 26 (OGS 7.192, 18-20). JI Soltom. H .E. 3.15.3; 4.28.5. t:us. ~t V. C(lNI. 2.22 (CeS 7.50, 8- 16) U~<";$ im~ O£V in a way th at plays on both senses, finthand visual i n ~ uiry and recording, and defiu eKClusive sdeetion. to Basil Haum. 3.6 (PG 29, 6~); cr. 4.5 (92A) and 5
98
Idttf
rif llis/o n
Atha nasiu s attacks tht' di\'inity of thf ~lXl s on thr !(Tounds that they we re me re mortals who " "'('Tt' drcrc('rl tu h(' I'allcd gods by Ihe- ord er of Theseus, of whom Wf' haw' heen inform.'d ( {OlOQOU~EvOU) by tht'
Hcllcllt's. " And he defends lilt' d ivinit y nf.Jt·sus nn tht, ~rounds that . a lthough " many \\'i $ (' own and ma!l;i ha\'(' ht'/' Il Tt'cordcrt (im:oQOuvto.l) among tht, C haldat'ans ,lOci Egyptia ns ilnd Indians," 110[11' had the P OW (' T Ihal Jes us has 10 sa\'(' pt"oplf" 1'\'(' 11 aftrT his dl'ath through his teachings. '! M os l oflcn , hOWCn- T. Ih(' vern used as "r('cnrd" or " Tf'po n " has to do with the Sacred Sc:ripwTrs. Atha nas ius all3 ek$ tht· disht·lir f of Ill(' .Jt'ws, sa}·ing. " Out Ill(' whole ~cr ip tur(' is filled with contradi cling the di sbelief of the J ews . For who amon.ri'; the just. Ill(' holy prophrts. and tht' patriarchs recordt"(! (to'topf)6tvnlJv) in tll(' di\'jllr Script u res had the birt h of his hod y from a \' irp;in ?"1! Likf'wi s(' . Throoorf'l us 1('115 us that the author of DCUl('rononl Y " r('{'orded (imopf)oev \ Ihings about the cities , 10 which hr ordt'r('d thost' to n (,(, whn had fa ll('n into unwilling murders." H(' also us('s lO'tOQElV ill this wa y rt· rt' rrin ~ \0 parts of Ihe Kcw T ~s tam (' ll\. " For alsH thr blt's ~)('d i\latlh("w has gi\'t'1l prophe tic testi mony. rr('Ordrd (lot6P'loov \ tilt' nl u urll in~ nf {"hildr('ll ," And again hr quolr~ Mallhl' w (27 :.17- 60) a~ III tht· body of J esus, and adds. "Tht> thric:r- hl ('sst'd Mark has madt' Iht> sanlt' poi lll : and I shall tell you what Iit' r('lalc's (lcnOP'lOt"V) ." u l\ l et hod ius \('lIs us what is recnrdcd about Lazarus: ' ; Eus('hius \(' lIs us what Cellt'sis . .J ns~ phus, Luke. and a {"('rwin Dionys ius .. rt'lalf' .....' And Ih(' fift h-cI'n lu ry cccl~sias li ca l historian Sozom('11 uses thr \'I' rh with a n r'x trt' mrly broad scope whr ll hr d('scriht's a n'rta ill Addas who had "great lea rning of till' thil1~ s thal had h('rll rrcordrd (i OTOe'l~tvwv ) by Grcrk and bv ecci("s iasl ica l wrilrn,"" "Alhan . C. .~tIIl. 10.1: ,·r. flfr, /i.b , 50.1: Tht'Ophillls , 11I11l1. 'J. .i IP(; 6. IOS7 Al ; Sotom . II.E. 1.1.1 6- 11; Eus. D,m. El', ".16.5 ( (.'(.';\· 'J.3 . IIH. 24- '1.7). " "Ihan . tu. I'"b. :U.7: Th~ophih's 1.. INloI. :U B IN; 6, 11458 )1 5p~a ks ut "our p rOphl"1 and l hI" st:'r"am "r God. ~I,,~n Kh ; II.~ ,UI an'ount of ( ll;lOUJoQWV) lhl' oti.l('in of tht world: ' "Thf'OdorI" IU$ Q. 0,,,1. tU ( P C; 80. 4088 ): d . ,. ZMIt. . I·UO (Pr; Ill. (956 8 ); Did/. 3 (N; 83. 157:\): G~r. AI. ln .l o, (1'(; 1661>1: Gt:'I:n. H.£', '1.. 17.18: So·w ln . II.£.. 8.18.8 ,(>" lllr 0 .1'.): 1 .1.5 (on Inr S : 1'. I. •\ Mt l h . Rm m , 3.18..1-5 (p. 4l.i 13-18): d : ).5.11: Thc-lxlorl"l US Q. H,X, 3 IP(.' 80. 140), "s.nom. I/.£.. 1.7 ( Pt;:1O, 91B- 9:H \ 011 GC- IIC-S;S: Ltl n05(; ). 1. 1(1 ( 1I 2AI. 1.11 ( t I60>\) 00 J OstphllS: :U (2'1U'\) ('n I. lI k~ ; 3.4 ,UtA) un I)to ll ~ li us, . " Sozom. nE. 7.'J. UI: d . 7.11A. \\'hH~ [OlOQtl~tvwV is lht:' rl'$uh ur $ 1~11' OOVUtlV, a nd EllS. H .t::. 3.6 (PG \1(1, l:ZO:JC ) .
n
Sacwl. and Profane History
99
Then'! is another use of the verb by Method ius, which has the ad ded feature that " what is recorded " refers to something other than the literal meaning of the words; fOI" example, on a passage in Judges (9:8-15) in whkh the trees choose a leader, Methodius commenLS: "Now it is dear that this was Ilot sa id about trees that have grown from the earth . For unensouled trees would hardly assemble themselves to elect a ruler, since they are fixed in the ground by roots. Rather this is recorded (lO'tOQEi:tat) wholly about souls, which , before the Incarnation of Christ , had all grown to wood through their s ins ." ~ This sort of use becomes increasingly important in C hristi an writings . The uses of lOlOQla by the Christian writers of la te an tiquity still reflect the modal distinction betw~n a kind of account and a kind of literary work ; but the lauer sense is now very rare. There are some few cases: Sozomen uses lO'tOQ(o quite generally as " narrative" in his Prefatory Address to the emperor Theodusius;4' and he elsewhere notes the accuracy that is n!quired of history!>!) and sta tes that what is fitting in a history (I.(J'Tnp£1;l Tl'piTl'Oll), it.. tas k, "is only I() relate what happened ."·\) Theophilus of Alllioch refers to what is contained in hi s own book, no longer extant, On Hisloriu and to the Histories of Herodotus and Thucydides. 52 Theodoretus refers to the History of J osephus and to the "first History of tht Maccabm . '~J Nearly always, however, the noun is used in the old er of the two modes of its usage, emphasizing the content rather than the form , as information or an informational account. Among old er su bjects, it is still used , at least by Basil , about natural things.}' Sozomen uses {o'toQCa for first hand acquaintance with buildings and places famous for sacred or secular reaso ns .~l " History" referring to cvents is used by John C hrysostom in introducing his account of the provenance of the Septuaginti he says, "But in order that you might learn that the • M~lh . SJ"IP. 10.2 (p. 123, 4-9). " Ibid . Pra~r. 4. " Ibid. 1.1.16. ~l lbid . 1. 15. 10. n Th~phil us A.l/kll. 2.30; 1.2; and cr. 1.72. n TheQd ar~lus hi DGlI. 11.28; 11.27; cr. EU5. H.E. 1.5 ( PG 20, 85A); 1.8 ( 1018, 1
cr.
100 place did not sanctify the books. but rather polluted them, I shall recount to yo u the ancien! his tory ({moQlav n(U..mQv).".'It> Theo-
doretus uses " hi slOry" about a famou s person . and. of course. it is a J>l!rson famou s for H:ligious Tt'asums . In the beginning of his account of the life of Peter Ihe Ascetic'. he sa ys, .. , know the st"a of his successes, and on account orlhis I am afraid 10 approach the his tory (lOtoQlO) of what hits been told ahnul him ." ;; And Eusebius gi\'es us the account (lo'tOQla) that Julius Africanu s had giw!1 to ex plain the a pparen t inconsislf'ncy rn-I .....cen :Vl al1hcw' s and I.ukc's \'(Tsiuns of
Christ's genea logy ..... Among
subj!"c!s. IhrTf an' alsu histori('s about the god s. The second book of Throphilus ' apo \ogfliC' Ad ..Iulo~ycum la k("s up the standard attack on h('lid in Ih(' pagan ~ods . In tll(' introductory section (2. 1) 11(" say!i th.1I hI' wanls 10 sa\'(' his audi .. n c(" from \'ain worship, " huI aiS(), I want to mak(' th(" Irut h d ('ar ICJ yo u fro m a few of your O WII his (Orit's (tw\, xata ot {otOQtwv ) which you read but d o nOI quite unders tand ." He" j1;()('s Oil (2.21 to argut' Ihat tht'rt, is a contradiction bt'twecn imagining (h(' gnds as mrn and (hrn worshiping the m as gods. " and Ihi s is whal happens to you . IOU, in reading thl' histories ( to.~ fmoQla; ) and )o!;t' lu'a lngi('s of Ih(" so-ca llrd mun' r(" ( tllt
gods." He su ms up a nuthf'r arlo:UIll("1l1 in 1111' same book : " \\'(' ha\'l! shown from their own hi:r;wrirs (tl; Utl'tWv t WV l<JlOQtwV) that the names of thos(' who an' t'a llt-d .l(o
.!,,'.
... 10. Chr~"S . All','. I.ti { P(; ·HI. 8.') 11: EUJ. al$ll uS<'sicrtOQio ;!buUI PIISt t\·t llts [HE 1.7 (PG 20. 968 ): 1.5 18IA- R)[ ,\Ild about f urrtllil'HnU [ f'. CtIII ll . 1.23 (CeS 1.19. 10- 12 ). Pr. CMJ/, i. W (r.C'i 1.2 15. 8- 1011 . ;lIId " ppuSt s l ; o.Qxa(wv IO'tOQ/or; 10 T~'¥ tldo" rQO$lj" III.£.:.!.I 11:11.\ 1). " ThtodortlUS Rt!. 1Ii." . !l 11'(,' H'l. 1:1110\ . · I::U5. 11.1:.'. 1, 7 (PC; 20. 898- CI . .. TIltophil u5 , 11.'/01. 2.3". lnons. D"ds 1.·1.\ '1--''1. 9' l-:us. II.F.. 1.1 IN; 'lit ~HH l. 'r;lIIs. Ril-ha rdson (.\ ·P.\'f).
Sacred ami Profam HUlory
101
none has done this, and he ex~cts it to be appreciated " by those who have a love of learning about history (n:EQl 'to XQlloto\J.O.8Ei5 tlli5 lotO{)(oi5 lXOVOW} ."61 The " history" here is certainly an informational account; hut there are some new features . Since the tXl
.109."'"
The examination of Christian usage in the first and second centuries suggested, scarcely more, that the Scriptures might be " histories" or at leas t "historylike." 1n this later period it is clear that the Scrip· tures, both the Old and the New T es taments, are thought to be and to contain " histories." There are numerous cases referring to the Testaments. First, in the Old T estament, Theophilus explains the mea ning of "firmament" in Genesis: " In the very beginning, therefore , of the history and genesis of the world (riis [utOQ(us: xut ytvEO£Wt; 'tou Hool-40U ), the holy Scripture spoke not about this (fi rma ment) which we see, but rather about another, heaven, which is invisible 10 us . . .. " Again, introd ucing his quotation of the description of Eden , he says , "And Scripture thus relates the words of the sacred history (Tf!s
.. Eus. H.E. 1.1 (528 ) . ., Eus. H.E. 1.1 (528 - 53A). The enterprise is also called a " hi5lory" at B.2 (744C) and an "ecdniasticat history" OIl 1.5 (BOO) and 2.prarr: (t32C). o Sozom. H.E. 1.1.11 (italics added ). He also n lls hi, work ecclesias tical hislory al Pner: 17, 1.1.18-19, 1.8. 14 , and 9.1.23 . .. [us. H.E. 1.4 (PG 20, 768 -C).
102 (O'toQ(a~
Uta
of History
tiis lEQaC;). ,,~~ Likewise J ohn C hrysoslo m advises us to
learn from what happened 10 David and Absalom : " let th e history (i1 lO"toQla ) be a straitening of your life. ";;0; Theodoretus relefS to the "histories" in the proph e ts.'i~ Besides these refert'nces to particular episodes in the O ld Testamen t, O rigen refers to the whol e Penta teuch as a history. Having given severa l examples of passages that comain a " type " or "palleTn" of broader or different signilicancc than tht tex t, he asks, " Bu t do you wish to learn , about the rest of the history (tmoQlac;)' if it also happenw typically ('tU:ltlX(ilC;)?"" In similar ways, the various pans of the New Testament are also called " histories ." Euscbius says that his ecclesiaslica l hislOTY must begin " with the main and lordliest events of the:: whole history about Jesus (tilr; xat' Qil'rev (m:opl a r; UluIOll<:;)" and also uses (moQ(a about the acts of Jesus' di sciples.~ J ohn C hrysostom ex plains why Matthew "called the his tory Good News {EuayytAlov ri}v tmopiov tK6. .... f.Uf.II) , " and distinguishes Matthew's (;'uspel from.lohn ·s in that the Iauer wanted especially to \\'rite about thc Godhead , ":lIld this is cle::ar both from the:: history itsdf (tl; o UTil<:; TiI<:; lOlOP10<:;) and from the:: introduction to the Gospd ."ll' Likewise:: Origen refers to the Gospels of J ohn and Luke as " histori es ," a nd insists that the " history" about J e.!lus is no more improbab lt" th an Ihe Old Testame nt "J1istories" of Adam , Eve, C ain , Noa h, and others;" a nd Methodius me::ntions how Ananias preached to Paul and baptized him "as the history (lmoQCa ) rel ates in Acts" and refers to the "histo ry" of Laza rus. 1? It shou ld be clear that the Script ures are:: here:: called " histories" not because they have a particular literary form but , rather, because they consist in a narrative a ccount about persons or events . There is more to be said about these Scripture " histories ." Origen suggests that it is very difficu lt or even impossi ble to establish the " Theophilus AUfol. 2.11; 2.20; cf. 2.32: 3.19. " 10. Chrys. h, PIli/m. 3. 1 (PC 55,35) : cf. Dt D llr. 7 ( JIG 54,758) and t::us. H .E. 1. 3 ( PC 20, 7lC). 61 Theodorelus h,l" . 45 ( PG 81, 705B): er. I II Sop" . 'l.12 (PG RI, 1852A) and Origen C. Ct/,. 1.44. Ijt O rigen PriII(. 4.1.13 (PG 11 , 369B), On Odgen', ~xcgelical method, SN' lI enri de Lubac. llisfllirt tl upril : l'illftUig(fl(t tU Etrifllrt tI'lIlJ1ts OnAi~( (Paris. 1950) . ., t::11I. H .E. 1.2 ( PG 20, 53A- B); 1.1 2 / 1I 7C, 12OA). " 10. Ch rys . I. MtJ ult . 1.4 (PG 57.16); 1.7 (17 ). "O rig~ b c. t' n . 223, 17e (CCS. POl. 9): C. Ull . 1.43 and 1.40 melllionl the latOQia of the vi rgin birth and the Cuspcl as a eollf:Ction or !mOQtat . ., Meth. S.J"IP. 1.9 .75 (p. 37, 16- 19) ; Me th. Rm.... 1.52.1 (p. 307 , 8- 12); cf. Gclas. H.E. 2.17.3- 5.
Sacred and Pro/ant History
103
truth of a history . He says, " It is necessary to say that the endeavor to show, with regard to almost any history (oxEl;ov )10.00'1 (cnOQ£av), however true, that it actually occu rred, and (0 produce a ca talepti c presentation regarding it, is one of the most difficult undertakings, and is in some instances an impossibility." 7] So that one must judge ca refu lly which ones to assent to (ouyxa'taEhloE'tm) and which to accept figuratively ('tQOItokO'fliotl). He even admits that "in the Gospels in the literal histories of events ('tatc; "to Q'l'tov j'E'yEVTlJ.1tvalC; {atoQlmc;) other things are inserted which did not happen."" He dsewhere says, "And we have this to say by way of anticipation about the whole history (lO'to{)COV) related in the Gospels concerni ng J esus, no t as inviting men of acuteness to a simple and unreasoning faith , but wishing to show that there is need of candor in those who are to read, and of much investigation , a nd , so to speak, insight into th e mea ning (d; 'to ~u).'lJ.1a ) of the writers, that the o bject with which each event has been recorded may be discovered ." 7S The writer of the " history" has some other object of thought (cSulvo la) tha n [ 0 inform, some other meaning or purpose (lJouA.'l,.a a). Similarly, Theodotus relates what happened "accord ing to the history (xata ut\' {OtoQ(av) in Amos," and adds, " but equally , along with these things, oth ers are brought to light. "76 Met hodius makes the same point, correcting an interpretation of Paul: " in my esti mation it would have been pointless for that wise man who wrOle under inspiration- I mea n Paul- to apply the union of the first miln and woman to Christ a nd the C hurch if the Scripture had in view nothing loftier than the words and the history {nov ~Tf'twv xal. Tf!; t(Jtopiac;)."" History thus mea ns what the actual words say, the literal sense ofScripture,11 but the Scripture histories comm unicate something else in addition to or instead ofwhal the actual words say. There are further instances of " histo ry" used to refer to kinds of things the Scriptures might communicate besides their literal refn Origen C. etu. 1.42. "Oritten P, i,,,. 4.1.1 6 (PG tt , 3778 ). " Orisen C. OIJ. 1.42, Irans. Crombie (ANF) ; er. LIe. t·r. 125. It Thwdorelus h. Air!. 1.2 (PG 81, I668A). " Melh. SJI"f. 3.1, tra ns. Musu riJlo (A CIf) . " ForlotOQta as the literal ltnse, sec Cyr. AI. /" w . (PG 12, 6840) and /"jll. (PG 73, 228"- 8 , 325C, 337A) . On Cyril's uegelic;ol method, s« A. Kcrrigan, MThe ObjetU or the literal and Spiritual Sensa or the New Testament accordi ng to SI. Cyril of Aluandria ," Slut/ill P.trislm, I ( - Tr:d~.NI U ,,/tTJlI(fntllltrl ;:., Gild,. dtT tllk/V. L i lutlhi, 63 ( 1957 1 1 ; 3~-74 .
104
Uta of HiJtory
crence. In his Homily on tilt Hexatmeron, Basil sa ys (6.2) Ihal " the dogma of theology is sown mystically everywhere in the history (nov. lUlOU tfJ lO"tOQlCjl)," that "the history ('I') iotO{)La) wishes 10 exercise: O UT mind" (2 .3) , and that "in the form of history (tv {otoQlao;: dhu) legis lation is given out" (2.8) that the day has priorit)· over night. Similarly, Theodoretus explains Ihal Zachariah's predktion of living waters going fOTlh from Jerusalem refers to Jesus, addi ng that " it is permitted to discern the prophetic truth in (hl' history (latoQlav ) itsdf,"19 Methodius tells U ~ that " Ihe history (lOlOQlO) abou t J o na h contains a grt~at mystery."1Itl J ohn C hrysostom thinks that WI!' should learn and teach the " histories " in order 10 strengthen o ur souls.RI And in Orig~n ' s tre ati s~ On I'irst Pn'nciplts (4. 1.9 ), tht' r('cognition that then~ are conlradictory s tatements in Scripture histories occasions an ex tended discussion of tht' principles of interpretation to be u s~d in such cas~s . Bri ~ n y , th~ point is that tht' histories contain certain mys teries that aim at the improvcmt:nt of our souls; thus they may be und erstood both fig urativel y ( tQOnt'Xw ~) and bodily ( ow~a tLxw~ ) , and the contradictions or things that did not happen which we may find in these hi s tori ~s are pu t then' to force us to se(' that there is a figurati ve meaning. Of course, nOl all the histories did not actually hap~n . Indeed . mos t of them are true: but whereas th~ whole Scripture seems to have a spiritual o r figu ra tive sense, the whole does not seem to havt' a bodily sense .lrl
It is appropriate to conclude this exposition with the Latin C hristian usage of the third , fourth, and fifth CCnluries. For, o n the o ne hand, the fall oflhe Western empire and t he accession ofChrislianity 10 a position of cultural dominance in both th ~ West and the East signal the end of that political and cultural organization of the Mediterranean and Europtan world , the career of which we call antiquity. And , on the other hand, it is precisely lht' C hristian thought of these centuries that , because of the growing estrangement of Eastern " Throdou: tus IN z,,(A. 14.B (PC.' BI , 19!13D); d . Q. R" . I , Q . 7 (PG 80, !l37C), 111 PSallll . 13 (PG 80, 949B), hI lslli. 1~ . 2 (PG 81. 34OD). /11 Eu~h . 3 1. 1" (PG BI. t 125C), III HIlA. 2.1 (PG 81 , 1797A) . IQ Melh . RWlfJ . 2 .2~. 1 (p. 380, 16- t9). " 10. Chry*. Dt full. 1 ( PG~, 1.s9); d . III PJG/III. >46. 1 (PG !IS, IB8) . a On Scrivt\lr~ s~aking {(J'[0Qt1(~, S~ Th«KIorclus hi na". 1104 1 (PG 8 1. I !l3'l). Orillen Lw. Fr. 2 17 (GGS 49.32 1), C)'I . AI. In ./• . (PG 1:1, 960C, 96 1BI.
Sacred and Pro/aM Hislory
105
and Western Christendom and because Christianity is the only crea· tive cultural force in the Wt.st, provides the intellectual foundations of the European Middle Ages. Let us consider first the period before Augustine. The uses of historia in the Latin Christian writings of late antiq uity uhibit the ancient modal distinction between informational account and literary genre. Although the former is now clearly dominant, there are some few instances of history as a literary genre. Of all the Latin Fathers, Jerome was perhaps the most widely educated. and most scholarly; and at a time when the Latin-speaking West was rapi dly losing touch with the Greek-speaking East , he was recognized as the one person who knew Latin , Greek, and Hebrew. Jerome uses hislona 10 indicate a written work about events in the public world in one of his letters (60. 12.3) . He writes: "A ntiquity admired a noble man , Quinlus Fabius, who is the writer of a Roman History (Romanoe scriptor his/anae) but made a name even more ITom paintings than from letters." He also mentions various others who write hislOry,Bl and even Eusebius' History 0/ tlu Church." Lactantius , an African rhetor turned Christian and said by Jerome~) to have been a student of Arnobius, pursuing the standard apologetical attack on the pagan gods, relies heavily on a work by Euhemerus, which is called his/oria and is about Ihe gods . According 10 him, "Euhemerus, an ancient author, who was from the city of Messene, collected the things done (res gestas) by Jove a nd the others who are considered gods, and composed a histona from the titles and sacred inscriptions which were in the most ancient temples . . . . This histona Ennius translated and followed ."16 Histona as a literary gen re , at least as regards the gods, is also distinguished from other genres. Speaking of certain rumors about the gods, Arnobius, African rhetor turned Christian apologist, says , "Well , let us grant that all these things have been handed down to lhe disgrace of the immortal gods by the jesting poets (a ludenli6us jHHtis). But what about these things which the histories wntain (historiae conli1ltnt), weighty. serious, careful, and handed down in hidden E.g., H ieron. /. Du . 2 (on 5: 1,6 : I, 7: 5), 4 (on 12 : 1-3); h. E,(<<Jt. 2 (011 5 : I sqq.) [PL 23,52]; 1111 hili. 5 (on 23 :6) [PL 24, 202]; Ep . 22.35.8; also Atn. Mv. Ntll. 6.6, 1.52. to Hieron. Vi,. W. Prol. (PL 23, 634A). l\ I bid. 80. "" Lact. Dil. /I1I#. 1. 11 .33 (PL 6, IHA); cf. 1. 11 .34, 36, 45,63, 65; 1.13.2; 1.14. 1. 11
IOti mys teries-are Ihest' jokt"s (/ascil'io ) thought up by Ill(' p<X'IS? If they seemed such absu rd fables ( infptiorum IflliusJabuln,) ~'O U would nrithcr retain them in use nor edebtate' ,twn as festivals thro ugh the years ."R7 Lactantiu s also dis tinguishes hi story from !mt' lry in making the same point about J O\'(' in particular. He wrill's: ;" 1 ht"rdofe. not only all the poets, hut al so Iht" writers ofhi slOrics and ancient (,\'cnts (Jrislorio11lm quoqUt ar "rum nnliquarum scrlp/orts) . who ha lld('d down to memory his dt"cds in Italy, agree Ihal he \\'as a ma n: Ih(' Grc('k!; Diodorus and Thallu s. the' l.atins Nrpos . Cassiu5 and Vafro,'·.... This is the old d istinction bftw('cn poelry and hislOry as narra ting . rc'speclively , fables a nd actua l (' \ '(" Il\ S. It is worthy "rIlOIf' , ho ",('n· r. that whereas thi s dis tinction carlirr cnlai lrd Ihe- rxclusinn of accounts of Ih(: gods from his/aria. now Ihr dis tinc:tion is madt" among accounts of ,h(: gods , some of which aTt' lake-n 10 bf truf and o thfTS not. H owever, hi510rio far morc ofle-n rfft' rs 10 a n info rmatio na l account per se than to an explicitly writte-n accuunt or ,ht, li terary ~r nre . In an older sense, Je-rome le-lis us what the- "writers of natural his lOry (J(riptou5 noturolis his/ariat ) sa y." by whi eh h,>IOt'ans Aris totlr. Theophrastu s, and Plin y."" And he' also ust's his/oria ahout persons. indeed aboul himse lf, introducing his famous account of thr clre'a m in whir h he was accust":d of being a Ciceronian rallH'r than a Christian. H t' sa ys , " I will relalf' 10 you tht· hi slory of my unhappint·ss (mm, injtfirila/u hisloriam) . '''", A larger group of use-s of hiJto riQ indicates a n informational account about social and political e-\·{'nls. Rt'pl ying to the charg" that C hristianity had brought disasters on thl' world . Arnubius says. "C o tbrough your hi stories (hiJ /oriaJ) and you will be- taught how <Jften a prior age by the sa me disrast's camr 10 the wretchrdn {'ss ofpu\'('rt y:' And he g~s on to li st othcr " \'arie-ties or turpit ud e, thos!' which histories or antiquity (antiquitatiJ his/aria, ) s uppl y."'" I.acta ntius tells us that "a ll history (omni.s his/aria ) is rull of rxampks''''! of tilr wicked IT Arn. Atlv. /1,'111. 5. 1;
cr. 1.38.
Sid. Apoll . I£p o I. t . IQI di slin,ll:uis hl's IIIJ/(I';II
rmm
~iJ hilfl,
• Lacl. Div. J~JI. 1.13.8 (PI. 6. 1888). " Hitron. In)". 3 (on 11 : 11) IPI. 24, 1891 . to H itro n. £p . 22.29.7 (PL 22. 416). This m a~ hc Ihl' liru inslanc!: orIriJI~'ill as a n a utobiographical account. It is I'clwtd in the title or .l,btlard·$ H is /tI .ilf (~ I"millll~"' . Sid. Apoll. lEp. 7.9.5] rd atl'S an anl'rdotl' alxllIl a r ('nain philoSQphl'r which Ms/o, itl UlfflIilf riJ rd at"; and cr. 8.3.-4 . " ATn. Adv. NIlI. 1.3, 5.8. ~
La CI. Dfv. ltul. fiJi. 17 ( Pl. 6. 6 ...... ,\).
Satrtd and Profane His/Dry
107
becoming more powerful than the good. Cyprian was another African rhetor turned Christian, and bishop of Carthage during the persecution of Decius. In a letter about the Donatist problem of baptizing heretics, he recounts how it happened that many people were led astray under such circumstances earlier; he says, " I want to set forth to you from history (de historia ) what was done among us relating to this same thing."U In these passages, his/Dria has to do with plagues, crimes, the careers of famous people of earlier times. These are like the events with which histories have had to do for a very long time----cvents in the public, human world . In the first two passages the plural is used, so that they might mean the account of these events. But in the latler two the singular is used , suggesting the meaning " past"; so that Lactantius would be saying that " the past" is full of examples, and Cyprian would be selling forth what happened "from the past ." A second subgroup of uses of historia in the sense of " the past" may be marked off. concerning events not in the public, human world . but in the biblical world . In order to understand the non temporal arrangemen t of the Psalms, for example, Hilary of Poitiers says that " . .. we should be thoroughly instructed in the history of deeds and times (in gtstorum et lnnporum historia ). For according to historia the third Psalm is later than the fiftieth."t' So that historia means the events orthe biblical past. Similarly, Hilary instructs us, in interpreting the psalms, to examine the supc=rscriptions in order to find out which ones have to do with his/oria. He says, "But other superscriptions, which signify eithe::r events according to history (secundum hiswriarn), or times, or days, or have ~en composed of something else, show in what a psalm consists either in the interpretation of names , or in a comparison of deeds, or in similarity of kinds . . . e::.g., a psalm with 'of David' or 'to David ,' or 'Saul' in the title:: is foresee::n to fall under the:: history of deeds (sub geJtonJ.m historia )."!r.i Similarly, Jerome observes that Paul's state::ment (Gal. J : 17) that he went to Arabia and returned to Damascus before he:: went to Jerusalem disagrees with what is relatm in Acts. "The order of history (historiae ordo) does not sc=em to agree with it, recalling what Luke says in the Acts of the:: "Cyprian Ep. 75. 10 (CSEL 3.816, 17- 18); er. Hieron. I" Daft. t (on 4:la), Bp. 60.5.3 (PL 22, 592), /" ~«It.. 3, on 12 : 3 (PL 25, 1(20). "Hi!. h Prologus 9 (PL 9, 2388). '" Ibid. 22 (2'4M- B); cf. 5 (235A), 9 (2388), Ps. 51 (309A), 54. 1 (347C), 63. t
(407C) .
108 Apostles."96 And he also tries to straighten oU( the order of (','en Is in Daniel ; for he comments on the finl dream: "This skt'tch which w(' now want 10 set forth , and which we are about IQ speak about , is prior, according to histo ry (iuxta historiam ) 10 the two ahovc .. . . But in the above o nes the order of history «(mio hi$toria,) is followed . ,, ~; The "order of hi story" d~5 not apply only to C\'1:01 5 within the biblical world ; J cromc is also conc('rned la correla te events in that world and events in the public world . H e comments on the Sl ateme nt (Matl. 2:21 ) that "after Herod's death the angel of Iht' I.o rd appeared toJoseph in Egypt ," sa~· illg. " Many fall into CHor nn accoulll of ignorance of history (propter iRnornnliam hi.Jlorhu) . thinking that it is the same Herod by whom the Lord was ridi cukd in his passion , and who is now accountt'd dead , So that Ht"rod who latt'r o n was friendly with Pilat(~: is th e son of Ihis Herod .""" And similar!\-. hf" wants to clarify severd l statements ill Daniel that s('em to disagret' wit h the succession of kings in I...ydia and Persia .... Su that hislor;fI as informational account about past c\'ents or the past may be applied to e\'ellls either in the publit· world or in the biblical world , or both. but there was not understood to he- any differenl'C in kind hftwt"en the- history of the J ews and Christians and that of Iht' nations , tlO tiifft'rt'llct, as history, In another large group of uses of hittoria, it ind icates an informational account about lht" gods, Tht' standard apologtlical attack on the gods includes the claim that they an" nOI divine. Lactamius argues that Saturn was thf" son of a mOrlai. and brings in Ht'rmC5 Trismegistus as a \\Iilness: " And Trismegistus attests lht" tru th of this; for when he said that " el)' few had t'xistf"d in whom then' \\'as perfect learning, he named among these his rrlati" es lI ra n us. Saturn and Mercury. And because h!' ignored tilest' things, ht' gave- another hi slOry (historiam ) in another plac('." I'" Elsewhert" he rders 10 the trut' history (tltra historia ) of Jupitt"r.'(1I If aC'C'(lunts about thr gods may b!' true, they ma y also he falst"; Arnohius insists tilat Iht' hiJlori(u of tht' gods' mutilations , frenzies , rapes. and tht" like- are ji(tionn and./nlsn,'Ul tI; Hicn)ll, Iq £p , ad (;al. 1 ( 1)11 I : 171 IPI. 26. :W8A I. " H ierun. Iq Dafl . 2 (on 7 : 11 . • Hiwm . Iq M«IIIr . 1 (on 2 :22) [PI. 26, '29Aj . ... Hiel1)fl. IfI Dal! . 2 (on !I :30- 31 : 6 : 1- 2a). " (I)fl t 1 : 11 : 1'1 : 8- 101, lOO U.CI . Dill. Imf. 1.l 1.61 (PI. 6. i82A) . 101 Ibid . 1.14.8- 10 ( 191AI . 1011 Am . Adll. Ndl. ~ , 14 - 1 5.
Sacred and Pro/ant His/ory
109
Such " histories," furthermore, may mislead. Commodian, the first Latin Christian poet, also makes the apologetic attack on the gods, discussing Saturn's devouring of Jupiter: Who sen t rain in those times. if Jupiter was dead? Moreover, is a god believed to be born of a mortal father? Saturn grew old on earth and died on earth . No one prophesied him before he came. Or, if he thunders, the law would have been given by him. The made-up histories (historiat co'!ftctat ) mislead. 101
Thus there are now understood to be both true and fanciful accounts of the gods, that is, accounts that are properly histories and those that are properly poetry or fable. Hisloria is being used to indicate what, in the opinion of the Christians , is true about those who are popularly esteemed gods, as distinct from myths or fables about them. Arnobius is willing to consider the latter hisloriat too, indeed he I"epeatedly calls them that in the fifth book of his apologetic discourse Adversus Nationts, which is devoted to attacking the gods. He rejects the imagined defense of the accounts as bei ng meant only allegorically,lCH on the grounds that one cannot tell an allegorical story from a nonallegorical one, and insists that all of them are records of actual events (rerum testarum conscriptiones) and hence arc damning evidence against their divinity .H~ In the Latin Christian writings of late antiquity, as in the Greek, hislOry most frequently has to do with an account of something from the Old or New Testament. Most generally, it is suggested that they are or contain histories. Replying to the charge that the Old Testament is false, Arnobius says, " but if that historia of events is false, as you say, then how in so short a time has the whole world been filled with that religion?"lOl Rufinus, translating Origen , says that the belief that the world began in time is "one of the ecclesiastical articles that is held principally in accordance with faith in our history (StCfJR dum historiae nostratfidnn )." 101 And J erome, quoting Exodus, refers to '" Commod. JllIlr. 1.6. 10-15; cf. 1.9.5- 9. ,.. Arn. AdiI. N4I. 5.8 .nd 32; cf. 7.44.
,., Ibid. 5.39; cf. 7.46 and 49. '. I bid. t.55. It, Rulin. P,. Oril. 3.5. 1.
110
Idta
of Hi.s tD~1
the sighing of the Israelites, "according to the history (iuxta historiam ),"'fJI He e1sewhrre mentions Luke's h.is/oria, the historia that is relau:d in J udges. and wha t the Gospel 's historia says ,l(lIj The later G rt'ck fathers discovered that ,here wefe some inconsistencies or even fal sehood s within the Scriptures. and solved the problem by supposing that there was some funher meaning 10 such " his tories." Among the 156 heresies that Filastrius of Brescia includes in his Book if Ht.T/sitS is Ihal of perrnitling such an inconsistency: "There arc other heretics who a llow no small error about the inequali ty of the psalms, es timating that tht' whole book of Psa lms is not by the mosl blessed Oavid ; and when they invcs tigate tht' his/oria in order, they find inequality, that is, thry discern that what is latcst is placed first , and what is first is lates!. "l lll His solu tion is that the "inequa liti es according to history" are tu be understood s piritually about Christ,lll He also poin ts out the heres), of findin g ambiguity in Isaiah and being upset brcaust: "now im'est igating hijloria. no ..... scrutinizing inLelligible reason, they fall into ambiguity , when both according to the letter therr is no small usefuln ess. and according to intelligible reason the celestial knowledge ofC hriSl rcsuuncls."'lll Simiia rl y. J eromf' ad,"ises us that "wllen tht' his tory mlllains either something impossible ur a "ice, it is tra nsf('rn'd tu hight:r things."' ll1 So that these accounts arc called hiJtoriar and are lak('n 10 be ca pable of or to require ~ ing understood about somet hin ~ ot hrr th an thei r literal mea ning , As with the G reek, so with th e Latin fathers t here is a thi rd subgroup of uses of lriJ/oria about e,"rnts in the Old or !'\'ew Testament . in which various things arc indicated as Iht' allernati\"t' mea ning or thr text. J erome says tha t "when a passage does not fi t al'C'ord ing to history (iuxta lriJtoriam) , it can ha\'l': anothC'r meani ng accord ing I{) analOb'Y ."ll4 And Prudenlius, the !i!:rcatest ('a rl y C hristian poet. sugg('sts that the "history" of Lot has a propht'ti c rn ea ni n~ :
.... Hicroll. J:.it. 18'\2.2 (CSF.i. !I·US, 17), ." , tl El', uti (~II. 1 {tin I: 17) l1'1, '.l6. :i2MA I. I" I..." . 1; .I;'.! t1'1. '.!~ . i'.!:1(, IImll . (I t. i" I,m'. 27 (PL 26. 27!lD). It. t' ilam . HlllT. 130.1 (CS£I, 38.97- 98 ): er: 13" .5 1:111. !liI ). '" Ibid. 130.3 (38. 98): d . 1]().7 (38. 99 ). It l l bid. 155. 1 (38, 130). III H;uon . 11I .HIIIIII. 3 (on 11 : ~ . 51 IPJ.:.16. 153.-\ 1: d : In tit. 4d (;/Jf. 3 (on 5 : 131 IP!. 26. n.JC - DJ . 11/#/1 . 0,. 101 I.ur. 5 11'1. 16. 742A- BJ: Rutin. I't. 0".( . 3.5.1. IlIlIicron . In £,,«11. :.1 (on i : 1:l I \PI. 15. 68J: c·r. tit. );1 . ~. 4 .
Sacred and Profane Hillory
III
Take in the famous monuments of deeds, in which historia giv~ beforehand a visible sign. l l ) The most usual di stinction , however, is between the lener and the spirit of a text, or between hiltoria and inttlligtntia . These are taken to be different ways of reading and understanding the Scriptures. About J esus' se nding two of the disciples to take an ass, J erome says, " Indeed it seems to me to pertain rather to the higher understanding than 10 simple hislory (magis ad alliortm inlelligentiam , quam ad simplium hislorjam). " II~ Although they are different , they are usually under· stood to be coordinate or complementary . Filastrius lells us, "Neither shall we lose historia, which makes it 70 years that the people were in Persia, nor shall we spurn spiritual knowledge. "111 Ambrose likewise says, " It seems to you highly exalted if you understand the letter. Cross over to the spiritual understanding, because the law is spiritual . .. ror the letter kills, but the spirit vivifies."1II J erome, speaking aboul the prophets, tells us that "every thing is to be taken spiritually , after the truth of history (historiae veri/alem )." And in two different places he says that histona is the foundati on or spiritual understanding. m The uses of historicus by the Christians in late antiquity tend in the same new directions as the uses of hislona , and show a renascence in the attributive usage. Historicus is used substantively to indicate writ~rs of histories abou t the gods by Lactantius, Arnobius, and Sidonius Apollinaris.''lO Prudentius speaks of " M oses, the histo rian (hisloricus ) of the world's birth . "111 But most often the adjective is used attribu· lively and in relation to what has a lready been ~een as the " historical " dimension of the Scriptures. Of the Scriptures, Ambrose says that Luke is a historian (hisloricus ), and adds that " he kept to the historical (hisloricum ) order and revealed to us many miracles among the Lord 's deeds. " And he also observes that the Gospel " is a rranged III Prud. HIJ,"'Hf. 723- 24. ". Hicron. H()IfI. OT. ill Luc. 3' (PL 26. 3250: d . In Don. 3 (on I J:3-4::.. 11 :5a). lit Iw . 1.1 (PL 24. 23). Ep. I ~" 2. 1. tll filam . HQtt. 107.8 (eSEL 38.67. 9- 10) . II I Ambr. If! PJ. 36.80 (PL 14. I055C); cr. Hil. PJ. 53.2. 11' Hitron. ["/JIJi. Pro!:. (PL 21, 208), 6.praer: (205C- D), and lip. 129.6; cf. I. uti. I (PL 23, 1065B-C). I~ Lac\. Div. bUI. 5.4.6 (PI. 6,5638), 1.8.8 ( 156A ); Arn. Mu. NI". 5.34; Sid. Apoll. Ep. 4. 1.2, 0 .8. 11 1 Prud . Hll",ll" . 339--40.
112
Uta of History
in his torica l style (histoneo Sly/o) . "I'U But usually historicus is used . n OI of the Scriptures thl'! msl":lvts, bu t of ,he way in wh ich we are to deal with them. Cassian tells us that "'earning explains the simple order of historical (xpositio n (historicOl ccposiIiQ'Jis). in which no more hidden knowledge is contained except what resounds in the words." 'u J erome, tOO, mentions this " historical" exposition, and says that he will pass on 10 the spiritual treatment of Isa iah no ....' tha t "we ha\'e laught the historical interpretation (historieD inttrprttationr) . "I~ I
Augustine is entitled la a separat e place in th is account no less becau,e of the importa nt modifica tions of usage tha t appear dearly in his writings than because he was the preceptor of the Middle Ages and his ideas have thence a cu rrency even in our own ti mes . Augustine uses his/on'a in the sense of th e lite rary genre when he refers to particula r written works a nd when he speaks, more genera lly, of the "writers of history. "!tl He a lso seems to think that hi$loria is a distinct genre, and that it is a part of ed ucation , for he insists that " those among the pagans. who, having been educated in the liberal studies, love history, easily recog nize" the numerous calamities that befell the Romans !>tfore Christianity .I"", Turning to older subjects, and to his/or;a as a n informational account , Aug ust ine uses the word in the sense of "na tural history'·n. and as an episode in someone's life. Ill! There is an occasional use of his/oria as a n informationa l account about the gods , l ~' a nd . like other Latin apologists of the time, he distinguishes among accounts of the gods between true ones, which he ca lls hisloria" and fa lsr or fabu lous ones , Jablllat. I'" Like other Christian writers of late a ntiquity. August ine und erstands the Scriptures as hisloria, and as his/aria with some other meanon Am b. bp. W . Prol. I (PI. 1~. 1607), Prol . .. { 1 609 ~-q . Proi. 7 ( 161IBl : cf. Cass.
Sacred and Profane History
113
ing. De civitate Dei is the greatest and most influential of all the Chris ~ tian apologies . m It was written to counter the claim that Christianity caused the fall of Rome. Its basic moves are those of aJl Christian apologies, and before them of Jewish apologies; one Iirs1 shows the inferiority of the pagan gods and cuhs, and then the superiority of Christianity. The device by which Augustinc pursues the task is the comparison of the "heavenly" and "earthly" cities. Thus, while the first part of the work (Books 1- 10) show how bad things in the earthly city are and always have been, the second part (Books 11 - 22 ) is a sustained comparison of the two cities as regards their origins (Books 11 - 14), their careers (Books 15-18 ), and their ends (Books 19-22). The examination of their careers is largely an exposition of the Old Testament. The Scriptures are or contain "histories" on Augustine's view . He responds to the question what " the writer of this history (scriptor huius hisloriae) intended in recording the generations from Adam ," '!2 and he insists that we should believe or accept these histories, saying , " Now it seems to me that the hutono is to be defended , 1('.51 Scripture be unbelievable when it says that a city was buih by one man at a time when no more than four men , or rather three, after brother killed brother, were seen on earth .... "m In his essay On tile Cllaracter of tile Eccitsia, he is even more vehement. HavingjusI put forward the curious argument that the ecciesia must be good because it depends upon good beliefs, he says (29.60) that the only possible objection is to suggest that the writing may be false; but no one would say that, h~ insists , " For Ihe compl ~t~ p~rvers ion of all literature will follow, and the abolition of all books handed down from the past, if what is III AURustinc himself so calls it (Rtfr. 2.69. 1; and cf. Ep. 169. 1 and 184A.5). Momm$cn L"St. Augu.Jlinc and thc Christian Idea of Progreu," )HI 12 ( 19.51 ) :34674J hu nOted that it mak" all the same moves as Tertullian, Lactantius, and Am()o biuJ. Both Allaner { PDI,.loV, tr.ns. HiJda C . Graef(New York : Herder a nd Herder, 1961 ). p. ~3J and Bardenhewer (PdltoloV', tral\$. ThomasJ . Sha hen (S I. I.o uis: Herder, 19(8), p. 481] C(lnlider the work an apology. P. S. Hawkins (" Polemical counterpoint in the f), civil.'t On," AlIllUlill;dll SluIJiu6 ( 1973): 97_I06j ar!tUCS that the contra" between the two citi" is nOI a theological or historical one, but an act of polemiul evangelism . That it is the best of the early Christian apologies has been recognized by Johannes Cdfcken lu.vi l rittiistlu" Apologtfttl ( Leipzig and Berlin , 1907), pp. 318- 211 . C. N. Cochrane { CltriJliDllig lUll! ClIJSlic
114
Uta of HjJ lo~ r
supporled by such belid of the peoples a nd fou nd co Oil s.uch consent of men and of times, is brought into doubt. so tha t it cannot have the credi t and right of en!1I common history (hiJlo,;n( quidl1l1 l:ulgariJ jidrm gro.lJilaitmqut) ." And in Iht' Ci{)' ~lGod ht, ha ses lhl' trustworthiness of Bible history on prophf'cies fulfilled and divine' a uthori ty: For in ..... ha\ narratioll uf "a ~ 1 r\"t' m ~ t'uule! Wt' 1~IIt' r trust than ollr which also prroicl('(1 ("o minl( (,,\'(,1115 Vil/llra ) whid! wr tlOW S('T hdorr ou r ('res? For Iht' "rry d i5aKrrt'nH' IH o f histurians (kistorjrorum) ;UllOII,l( themsd ves gi\'f'S us grounds titf trustill,lo( radt r r him wh .. du('s 1111\ ('011 lrall icl the d i"inr hislorio th at ,,'r hold .... IThl' Jla~;lJIs. s(' dn~ Ihr contradictio ns amOIl!{ tht' iT hi slnria ll ~. knuw lIut " 'hum tu hri irn',) But we, relyin!!: on ri i" inr authority ill our rrJi!l: iuu 's his tor) Ii/l /I(1,I/m( rdig io"iJ lriJIO ria)
ar(' in 110 dO llht that wha tr\·t'T
r('.~is t s
th a t is rumplr ' t'ly fa lse. ..... ha.('\·('r ot h(' r th i1\J,:s mal" h(' in .~ t,t·lIl a r lit(' ratun'. wl,i('11 whet her th(' y b(' 1ru(' ur ,;.Is('. [onl ribulI' Illllhinll;: ..I' irnpurtatKI ' hy which we might lin' ri):tlllly nr hI Nist'dly.llt
Altho ugh , th cn. wc arf' to trust Iht'5(' historil's, Augustin e clt'arl y recognizes that they also han other meanings. He says, " I do nOI oon d ~ mn those who have Iw'en able 10 1';If V(' 011 1 a mcanin~ of s piritual und erstand ing (un.m m intrlli.r:mliar spirilnlis ) rllr t'\'cry t>\'('nt there. so long as they han' li n t mainlainl'd t ht' t ruth or history (historial vtrilalr) ."tn And hc latt'r goes further , in s is lin~ " thal wt'should agree neither with those who will lakr Ihr hi story onl y (Jo/am his/oriamj aboul thr ark and th c ll<xKl withuut allt-gorical signilicam;e. nor with thost' who deli'od flnl~' ligun's. havi ng rcjt'c tt>d historica l truth (his/orico ,·"i/olt) . "I M. J.ik('wis(', \\'(' an' I .. u~h l hy th(' s('n'nty tran sla tors " to set' a !e\·t'1 a hm'(' hiJ'l orin and In sl'('k nUl IhoSI' Ihi ll!(S which the h.iJloria it se lf \\"a..~ wrill t'1l It ) I'OI1 \'('Y (si!:nifiamda ),"II; A third subgrou p of ltiSI()ria ahout Ill(" Sniptures cxprt'sses and instanccs Augusti nc's \" i ~ ws lIl1 I'x('g('sis. Ht' ,,'ritl's : All that Scri pturt. thr. rdorf' . which i5 calkcl tht Old Tr5larm:nl , I~
et:
IS
Aug. CD 18,40; 18.jfl. l i ra Hr! . .".0,99, IJ«I. Ch, . i .i8 .H , On Augustine- 's ~-iew the- authorit~· 0{ Scriptur!' a nd the- ITlatio" I)(' t"'e-"n ltiJluria a nd 'Tophl/ia as disclosure-s or G od's purposn. Sff R. :\. ~Iarklls. SirtfMl''''I: HjJI(I~ r ItRt! s.ti,{r ill /h, 17ultlfJ!{~ G/ SI. AWRltSlj", (Camb ridF!'" 19701, p. Ifl7-96. 11> Aug. CD 17.3. A ug. CD 15.21.inir 10; Aug , CD 18,44 ,
I"
or
So.cwi. and Profane History
11 5
handed down four· fold to them who desire to know it; aecording to history (StClfl,Jwm hislorilJlfI ), according to aetiology, according to anal· ogy, and according to alkgory; according to history when there is taught what hath been d one; what not done, but only wrinen as though it had been done. AccOf'ding to aetiology, when it i ~ shown for what reason anything hath been done or said. Acc;ording to analogy, when it ·is shown that the two Testaments, the Old and the New, are not contrary to onc another. According to allegory, whcn it is laught that certain things which have been written are not 10 be taken in Ihe letter (aJ litltram ), but are to be understood in a figure (filurall)Y·
The same four ways of setting forth the Scripture generally are else· where noted . I" ".Jerusalem," he tells us, refers to both the terrestrial Jerusalem according to hisroria and to the celestia l J erusalem in a figure .I .o But he says that the whole book of Genesis should be exa· mined first as hisloria then as prophecy, and where the li teral sense is not worthy of God we should take things figuratively .141 The latter half of the City of God is an extended account of the origin, career, and end of the two cities . In this di scussion is found the largest concentration of uses of historia anywhere in the early Christian writings. And there is here a fifth group of uses of hisloria as informational account about the past or past events i n which the Scriptures, as embodying or containing the hisloria of the Chosen People, is distinguished from and opposed to the hisloria of the nonJudaeo-Christian peoples. On the one hand , there is the sacred (sacTa ) or divine (divina ) hisloria. In spite of lack of physical evidence for the longevity of people in the Old Teslament, he says (15.9) thal ". Aug. VIii. Cud. 3.5; cr. 3.6, "' Aug. (Jell . Imp . 2.5; eKample! 3.6.init. for prel c-m pUI"J>OlSC'S il is sufficient 10 show Augustine's U,JC of the idu of history in conn«lion .... ilh the literal level of biblical excgesis. For an anal)'sis of his I':K~lic.a1 Ih«Iry and ils development during his Caretr, Set R. A. Markus. SD«IIilUll. A simila r fuurfold system or exeguis-AiJlorit'1IJ or liInrllis, tr/1fNllolinu, afJtllfTUIIJ, and 1Il1l1l!lIfNIIJ-is vc-ry .... idel)· aettplcd Ihroughout the Middle Ages. S« Harry Caplan, ~ The four Stnses of Scriptural Interpretation and the Medieval Theory of Preaching-," SfHn'/"," 4 ( 1929) : 282- 90. Henri d e Lubac IExi,tist Mtdiirxllt (Paris: Aubier, 1959-64) J ofTers an cxtensh'e and detailed analysis of Ihe fourfold I)'stem with voluminoU$ documentation of patristic Ih rough lale medieval sources. t·ur Augustine'S \·ie....5 of the ut ility of " history" in biblical eKegnis, w: Doet. Ch,. 2.28.42fT. ,.., AUK. CD 17.3. ,.. Aug. Gm. c. .tt/limit. 2.2.3. The same general principle abou t literal alld figurative panagel is laid down in the Dt d«triM clrristialls (3. 10. 14 and 3. 16.24), but only Ihe gelleral di5linctlon btlween lileral and figurati ve is opt"ralive there.
11 6
Idea of
Histo~.,
" faith in this sacra hiItoria is not to be wi thdrawn ." The sorra Jristor;a shows that Nahor, the brother of Abraham , left C hald aca and se tll ed in Mesopota mia ( \6. 13). Elsewhcr(' we examine wha t this soaa histon"o says abou t the son of Selh .'u And to lhos(' who worry a bout how ma ny peop le there were when Cain lo undf'd his ci ty, he replies ( IS.8) that "the writer of this samrlristor;a d id n OI haw' to nc("essa ri ]\' na me a ll the people who wert'! the n, bu t on ly . hus(' whom the plan of the work requ ired . For the ai m of that write r. th roug h w hom the holy Spirit was working, was 10 com(' down to Ahra ham ... and t hen 10 proceed from Ab raham to God ' s people. w hich \~' a:o; S(' I a pa rt from the other nat ions (0 cd rr;J grn(i6us) and wou ld Sl' f\ T tu prd igur(' and foretell all things t hat rr la t(' to thr city .... " Su this sarr(l histl)ria has to do with God's peoplt'. who are st"pa ra te fro m Ihr ntht'r gtnttJ or peoples. O n the ot her hand , ther(' is th(' hiJIl)rin of these JX'op\t's , the hislorin gentium. The h.i.Jtoria gmlium praises the marw lous construction of Babylon ( 16.4), b ut " the historio gmtium tlt'i t ht' r G reek nor Latin knew" about the Flood ( 18.8). It tells, t{)(I. abou ttht' wondrous works or miracles by which the gods pt'rsuadt'd proplt· to worship , hem (10. 16, 18). And the hiJlol"iu gnltiuIII also ("( lIlIaius IlUlIlemtlS punents. 11< When the Sc.:riptun!s art' n~ ft' ITt"d tu a.' hi.\(mill it is with a view more to th('ir con tent- wh at kind of ,,("("OUll t t h('y a rt'. faclOa l or fi gura tive-tha n to their J(lrm. In tht, OPPOS iliull be tween sacr('d his· loria and the historin I)f thl' pcoplrs. hiJ10rin 5t'('ms tu indica lt' a mi xture of the meanings informa tional account "I)( ,ut pa ~ t e\'rlHs a nd tht, informa tion itself or " tlu' past:' though l eat1 ill .~ morr [oh'ard Iht' fo rmer. T here is a fin al group of uses of histaria in which th(' mixture of these two strains lea ns mor(' toward " th('" past" per se. The fir st half of the Cii.J of Gad raised thr s tandard apolog(,l ic def(' nse against the charge that the fall of Rome was due to Ihr wors hip of th(" l1("h' God and forge tfulness of th(" old gods who gave RoOlt' peace and victory. Augustine replies " tha t for Ih('" most pa rt they (0 01 (" about against their will. not only fa bl("s. lying abou t ma n r II Iill~s a nd ba rel y ind icating or showing any thing true. bUI also Ro ma n history itself (ipso Ramona h.istaria) test ifies ."14I Agai n, "both ancien! his tory (vrtus Ms-
cr.
,./ A... g. CD 15. 17; 17.8, 18.40. 17.24.ini l. ,. , A... g. CD 2 1.8; cr. 4.6. 12.11. 16.8, Dlld. C,o\ ,. 2.2H...I2-43. OH Aug. CD 3.10; cr. 2.3, 18.38.
Sacud tJnd Profant HiJlory
117
tona ) testifies and the unhappy experience of our own times teaches us" that people are sometimes reduced to cannibalism .,n And , a rgu ing that the 89th Psalm is a prophecy ofJ r::sus, he says ( 17. 10) tha t the dire descriptio n of the state of the world in lines 39-45 applies to the earthly city, " but of the way in which these things came upon that kingd om . hisloria is the indicator of event s (index rerum gtstarum l, if it is read ." Finally , an even clearer example is found in his t reatise about the discovery and expression of the meaning of Scripture, On Christian Doctrine. The twO chief sources of obscurity in Scripture are unknown and ambiguous signs. In the second book he claims t hat ignorance of signs is to be remedied in part by knowlcclge of the origina l languages and con texts and in part by knowledge of things. In the quest for greater knowledge of things he permits the use of some profane sources; bu t profa ne knowledge may be of ei ther human or d ivine institution. Some of the former , for exampl e. astrology a nd divination. are superstitious; bu t some are no t. Among those kinds of knowledge useful for und erstanding the Scriptures that a re not of merely human institution Augustine includ es histo ry. H e says: Whatever, then, informs (us) about the order of past times- Ihat which is called history (Quitiquiti i&ilu, tit o,dint tnnporlim /'lllUae/orom intiiea/ ta quae IlPfHlla/uT his/ofia)-assists us vc:ry much in understanding the sacred Scriptures, even ir it is spoken outside the Ecclesia as a matter of childish instruction. From it wc may learn . for example , the consulsh ip in which J es us was born so that we are nOl confused about his age when he was crucified; fo r "this may be collected more dearly and more certai nl y from a comparison of the history of the peoples (h istoria gentium) with the Gospel." The usefulness of history (utilitas his/oriae) is also shown by thc fact that Ambrose. " having investigated the history of the pro· pies (hiStlJria gentium )," proved that Plato lea rned his phi losophy from the prophet J eremiah (sic) . H e conclud es: Even when in an historical narratiun (lIorrafiont /tiJ/oriea ) funner institutions of men arc narrated, the history itself (ipsa kisloria ) is not 10 be numbert'd among human institutions; for those things which "re past 1o, AUK. CD 22.20; cf. I BA I.
118
/dta
of Hj.s/o~y
and cannOl be- undont . bd(lllg III Ihe- ordtr of timts. of which God aloll(' is tht' author and admi nistrator. For il is our thing 10 narralr' what has ixl'!n donr, anulhrr 10 tta e h what ou.~ h l to br dOIlC', Hi s to~' narratC'S what has rn-cn dUlle faithfully and IIsrfuJly: but tin: I.xxlks of tht haruspicrs. and Iht' lik(' writinJ(~ . lIim 10 I('aeh what ought 10 br dOllt (If obsrrw:d . with Ih(' holdnrss ofall ad\';srr. no t tht fidd ity (lfa r('portrr (non i"dids Jidl) . I M.
or the
passages I!:xtrac tro alxwe. thi' run text of the first d~s nOI permit a clear judgmcnI whc{hcr hislO~I' means an account of pas t events or " the past." In thr second passage. howeve r. "the past" is cil'!arly meant: for in Ihe lint st'n lr J1CI;' thl' " history itstW' is rii~ti n· guishcd from lilt' " his torical narralion:' and Ihe passage follo wi ng the semicolon virtuall y defines the "hislOry ilSelr' as "t hose things " 'hich are past and cannot oc und o ne (quat transjt,unl , nr( info(ta jirrj /JOmm/ j:' And Augustine's point hert" is that hi s lor~' so dt"fincd ("an he ust·rul in uud crstandin ,~ Seriplu rt· pn·cisdy IX'cause it is 1101 a human production nUl . ratiH'r. a didne prudunion: it helongs "to the order of times, of whit-h lhe- a uthur and administratllf is God ," This is the first and only ins taller- in antiquity in wh ich hi story is said 10 be an existing ('fuity and / m uudl"r til('" cOll trol of (Incl . Augus tine's USt'S of hiJlorirlls, like ,II(' l"(mtemporaneous ust's by h" O
C hris lian wril t"rs, It'an IUward the attribUli w lIsa~('. ilnd I('nd tu brar OUI th(' sorts of s hili s that Ihe uses of hi,(/orin sugJ~('"S I. It is use" suhslanlin,:ly to indicau' hiswrians of uawn', ll; historians uf (' vt'II I S.II~ and those who h,I\'!' handt'd down an'ur;lIe ;t(TOUnlS uf Ih C" gods . IO ·'
The a tt ributin' u sa.~(' t'X('('I'ci s th e suhslal1tiw: ,md \\"hilt, it ()(:casiollally occurs in Ihr- ('(mll' XI Ilf il\\'estigalioll of 1I'lI urt". n , it mort" often ha s to dn wilh rrli~itJus ma1t('rs. TIll' 1C"lldC"l\cy among tht" Lalin Christi an apologists, alrt'ady lIo\t'd , 10 dislill!>:uis h IWlw('('1I lru(' and false accounts ahout tilt" ~IK l s, is rq)('tllt'ci ht'IT . :\U,II;IISlil1l' cuntends Ihat tht" gods \\"t' r(' 0 11(1' 111("11 , "as 1I0t olll y pot'lit' lil t" rawrc , hu t al so historica l (ltisioriuu l hands dU\\II : T " Similarly, Ill' tiistillgui slws the ,~,
..\u/t . 0 0£/. f .llI . :.1 .:.1I1.4:.1- H . t hI 1110' IN t/",'lmfU Ihml i",,,,. " ... 11, \ .... tidn . " "1"10("
.'\ll.l(m , illl·'~ I), """I' i~" dt,,,li,m,,:' . l u!!It"i~ i(llt tl\lt«)I : !~1-1:l4 .me! ~Th" (:" ,11 "11\ ;ml l .\o')(II IU'·1I1 III "\II)(Il~ lhlC"·' ,I"rlm",
Su bj ',("1 alKI Slnll"IUrl' "," A"Kt~lIillit",,,,
:11 (1!11I1 1: 11;:>41:.1.
,,; AII.I(. CD IIl.H.
,,_ ....... IIIl; . (,(),. . ,3, 0 •'. ".. . ., .. ,•, ..1. '0' . . ,•. . •,• ,. ,""
, .. :\ tlll: . (.f) 0.1, 111.11. , . , :\IIIt. f'-lid, . :I.!l. Cl) 1:1.\1, 1t;.!I.
,., "'''.1(. (."1) 1.:l7: d
:1.:11 , 0.",. Chi . 1 .111.-1-1 .
n.·
S'U ";'.
11 .hl'i,'im'l/:
Sacrui and ProJant Hiswry
119
fabulous (fabulosa) from the histori ca l expla na tion (his/orica ralio) of the name of At hens, a nd nOles that while the account of M inas is accepted as historical IrUlh (historicat vtritati ), th at of J upi ter belongs to the emptiness of fables ( t+an ita ti J(J bu l(J rum ) . ' ~2 As regards the Sacred Scri ptures of his own rel ig ion, he says tha t "some spi ritua l significalion may well be found in the account of paradise. in which ,he first human s dwelt, agreea ble with the historica l truth (ucrtilult' hisloricd,) of its bod il y existence. ", n And, whi le pleading ignora nce of the reason why certain ancient books a re not included in the canon of Scriplure, he confesses: I think even those men to whom the Holy Spirit cNtain l)' rc ... ea l~ mallt:rs tha t prope rl)' rdl within tht: aut horit), or rdigion may have wriuen sometimes as men , by historica l investigatio n (Ms/oricd difigmtill), and sometimes as p rophets, by divi ne inspi ra tion; a nd the two kinds wen so difrerent that o ne kind , such was the vt'rdict , must be crw iu:d , as it were, 10 Ihemsd ves, the olher to God speaking throu~ h them . T h us onc kind contri bu ted to the increase or knowlc-dgc (ad II/m laltm cognilionis), the other to the au thority of relig ion ; a nd in this authority the canon is guarded . ' 5'
Thus the view that the Scriptures are at least ill one aspect " history" or " his loryli ke" is echoed in these statemenlS about thei r histori cal truth and the historical investigation tha t seemingly went into them.
Aug. CD 18. 10, 18.12; er. 18. 16. A ug . CD 13.21.ini l. •.,. Aug. CD 18.38, Irans. Gr~ m: (I...oeb). I~ '~I
VI Conclusion: The Development of the Idea of History and the Cultural Ferment of Late Antiquity
H E ANC IENT W O M-!)
to"tooQ either m eant someo ne who was known
for a capacity "see" clearly which of two conflicting accounts T of an emotionally charged matter was eOTree l, or, used as an adjec· (0
live, attributed that capacity to someone. The verb lO'tOQElV s(':ems (0 have been derived fro m lO"twQ; and in the H e llenic Age it indicated the activity characteristic of the ~C1tWQ , tha t is, findin g o ut o r inquiring the correct a ccount in a case where the ma tter is both disputed and emotionally charged . The noun l(J'[~ia seems coeva l with the verb; of far less frequent occurrence in the Hell eni c Age, it meant an instance of the activity indicated by the verb, an inquiring ur an inquiry of that sort. After Herodotus published his account of the Persian Wars under the title [moQlul, HisloritJ, however, the noun came to ind icate the resu lts of such inquiring, and these either writtl::n or not. What underlies thl::se uses, however, is an activity idea : inquiring for accurate information or the facts about persons, thillgs, or events. Perhaps because of the authority that the wo rk of HerodOlus had already attained, [O'toQ{o in the Hellenistic Age eaml:: in creasingly 10 indicate the results of inquiring and these especially as a written ac· count concerned with events; tmoQ£a as a literary genre. At the same time, lO'tOQElV acquired the meaning " to record , report , or rdate"
122
Id/Q of H iJ to~r
some informatio n, a meani ng 1" 'idC'n1ly d('rin~d from L01oo(o
fI"
Conclusion
123
the Christian and non-Christian ideas of history are that the Christian is almost always applied to maners of religious interest and that it regularly occurs in the context of apologetical attacks on the pagan gods and defenses ofChristianily. Non-Christian Greek and Latin usage during the later empire generally continued the developments of the preceding centuries. The shift away from history as a literary genre to hi story as an informational account was very marked , and the former became infrequent. The requirement of accuracy or factuality of the account continued on the wane. The Christian usage of the later empire reveals the divergence between East and West in the dirrering devc10pmenls Ihal the idea underwent in Greek and in Lalin . In both languages il appears most often in two contexts: bibli cal exegesis and apology. In both languages history is involved in exegesis because scriptural accounts or the Scriptures themselves are consid ered hislOrics; these histories , however, are capable of bearing another meani ng. Lileral exegesis is " according to history," as opposed 10 various kinds ofligurative or spiritual exegesis. In the apologetical writings, however, therf! is a difff!rence betwf!f!n the Gretk and the Latin. Thf! Greek Christians carry on the same USf! of history in the apologies tha t charactf!rized thf! earlier period, that is, history as story. But the Latin writf!rs rf!3Ssert the old requirement of accuracy, and argue that the truth about the gods, thf! histories about them, show them 10 be unworthy of worship. Thus what history mea ns u, them, th eir idea of history , is trUf! informational accounts or informatio n about persons, events, and gods, and the relalionships between peupl e and thf!ir gods; and they even seem to have used history in the collective sense as the past, implicitly distinguishing thf! history of the Chosen People from that of the non-Christian peoples . lt is in this last usage that Augustine makes his great innovation. For whilf! his usage is in no essential way different from that of his Christian contemporaries , he makes of the distinction that they only implied- the distinction and opposition between the sacred, providential history of the celestial city and the peoplf!s' hismry of th e earthly city-the dominant literary and rhetorica l moti ve of his City of God. Although thi s distinction and opposition is present, history in both caSf!S seems on the evidence to indicate an informational account or the information itself, rather than the hypostati c unit ), of lilt: past, which our word " histoT)'" sometimes mea ns. ' Th e opposition , I
R. A. Marku5 iSaI"fllI.",,: H illflry fllft! StKid.J ilf
l~ T1t.tfllol.r
af Sailt/
.. IIW'l/i", (Cam·
124
Uta
of lliJIOrl'
the n, might better be expressf'd by ",he sa c r~d ur di\'inc aCCOUnl of things" and " the peoplrs' account of things:' The hi!Hory is, moreover, meaningfu l both in the sense Ihat besides the literal meaning there may ht· a "high er" liT "s piritual " way in ..... hich il is 10 be unders tood uud in the sense Ihat aCC'I)"n!s of earlier {'\"cnlS are pro. phetic of la tu. What Augustine means by ,hI," te rm " history," then. is true and meani ngful informational accounts about th(' ~ods and (di-
vi nely IiIled ) c\'cnts ora pcuplc , It lollows from all this that Ihl" widely acccpterl ac(Ounl of the id ea of hislOry in antiquity is wrong nn a number of points. In tile fi rs t place, history was not it phi losophical problem to the Greeks or the Romans. I1 is no ..... here disrussrd hy th(' philosoph('rs , It ta rn(' in for som(' cri licism among th e pr('-Socra lics: Plaw's Socralt's rejecled it as philosophically insuflic:it'nt ht'('aus(' it did nOI ('xplain Iht' ca uses; Ihe Stoics, Epicurea ns, and Skeplics sca rcely mention('d it. ,-\ristotle sa id Ihat poetry was mort' philosophical tha n hislOry, hut hf' also st'f'med to think that his tory in tll(' s(' lI ~r of accurate info rmation ahout a su bj l"ct was u~eful or nrC'('ssary as a prerequis ite tu the prope rl y philosophical enterpri~(' of IrarninK tht' ca uses , This "it'\\' sun'iH''(t in the Peripat etic School lon~ "rH'r Aristot\("s d('al h, and durin~ Iht renascenc(' of tht' school in late antiquity ('\,('n the Mas ter's rcsumr-s of earlier opinions alxlUt wha t('wr problrm Iw happrnro to hc cons idcring wcre ca lled hislOri('s hy AI('xandtr of Aphrodi~ias and Syrianus, But for all thaI, history was s till not a philosophical problem , And this is not s urprising; ielr history, as has bt'cn 5('(' 0 , was nul an entity or a category of rea lity ~u('h that O ltt' might h:",c dillicuhy understanding il. S('cond, his tory was not rela terl by a ncir nl writ('r5 to the ways in which Ihc\' understood tim(', Time did COnll" in ror som(' consid eration by philosopher'S and ot he rs; and il i~ ollr of Aristotlc's categories, al least in som(' ('lIumerations of them in th(' corpus, BUI if time as the "when" of something j>£IS(,S phi lo!'iuphi cal problems, time as the medium of hisHlr), does nOl , Pr rhaps this rr Ot'clS a kind of philosophical nai'vr-:tf about the logical rr-:lat ionship \x't w('ell the ideas of time and history , hut it s('cms unlikdy that this problem would occur to someone who did nOI Ihink aOOUI tht c at e~ory or ('ntity " history," brKl!!~ , 1970), pp, 14-1 5,231-32 1 m"krs ~(wt~n
trn- umt point w hill' $hl!w;n,1I; tht dHrl'fl'ncC'
what AURuSl; nt :m d Cullma nn mun
b~
"!L
125 and did not think that history indicated the whole temporal process of a thing. The idea of history, then, is not understood as being dependent on or derivative from the id ea of time. At any rate, there is not a single view of lime as a circle that all Creeks accepted, as is supposed (see p. 12. n. 34 supra). It is also not the case, third , that either time or his tory was a great problem from the point of view of Greek or Roman religious thought. So it is a misunderstanding of ancient thought to say that , sin ce time was understood as cyclical, it "must be experienced as an enslavement, as a curse ... everythi ng keeps recurring . . . . That is why th e philosophical thinking of the Greek world labors with the problem of time and also why all Creek st riving for redemption s~ ks as its goal to be freed from this e ternal circula r course and thus to be freed from time itselr. '" Time may have been a puzzle to certain ancient writers, but there is no evidence of its having been experienced as an .. ensla ....ement" or a ··curse." Nor is it the case tha t philosuphers " Iabor" with the problem of time, nor does any Greek stri .... ing for redemption seek to be liberated from time. In deed the stri ....ing for r«lemption is a ty pi cally C hristian goa l, bUI not Greek or Roma n. History is also not a theologica l or religious problem for the C hristians. It figures in their apologetical and exegetical writings, but in neither case are there problems posed Ihat relate la C hristia n doctrine. History does not fi gure in the creeds or in the antiheretical lite rature in which C hristian doctrine was bdng fo rmula ted . There were speculati ....e problems raised and discussed in this earl y period of Christianity, but hiuary was not one of them . Fourth , neither Greeks no r Romans nor C hristians understood history as ha ....ing a pattern . No Greek or Roman has been found saying tha t it is repetitive, nor any C hrist ian saying that it is li nea r and once and for all . In order for someone to fi nd a pattern in history, history must be taken to be the sort of thing th a t is capable of exhibi ting a pattern ; that is , a composi te whole, made up of parts capable of being organized in a conceivable pattern . I n other words. history must be understood as the coll ected temporal career or process of a thing. But no one in antiquity unders tood history in this way: not the Greeks and Roma ns, and not the Chris ti ans . It might be argued that Augustine comes very near or that he creates I Cullma rll'l, Cltnsl "lid Timt
( tr~ns.
t-' ilson ), p. 53.
126
Uta
~ 1/ulory
the condi tions for unders tanding history in this new way; b ut this is 10 read Augustine from th(' point of \'iew of lalcr tradition. Finally, whi le history dot's. as is widely belifvcd . hecome meaningfu l in Christian tho ught . this d O<'s n OI secm 10 be due 10 reflection on [hdr rel igious hc.-lids, or for any th eological reasons. Rather. the J ews and , foll owing them , thl' Christia ns s uppose that their Scriptures were or conta in ed histories. In this Ih ey conformed 10 contemporary usage, which allowed that a history mig ht be ahoul gods or divine acts and t ha t it need nol he trlle in the older s('nse of conformity to observed lacl. In Ihe apologies lh('!'.c histori{'"s WCT!' used 10 s how how bad the popular rrligioo was and how mu ch better C hristianity was, And in tht ('xt"grtica l .....orks apparent incon sistf'n cies or immorali ties were ,'xplainrd hy th e U Sf' of nonlilcral exegesis. Nonlite ra l exeges is .....as a G reek iTn-ention. dating hack 10 Ih(' l'iflh century at leas!. So t here ..... as nothing n('w in tht' C hristians applying nonlit eral exegesis to thrir Scriplur('s. What i:-; lIew is that the samr account Ihat is called a his tor y is also sa id 10 ha\'(' some other meaning , Thi s is a reg ular feature of the C hristian exegr-ti cal litr-rature. so tha t history acquires th(' capacity to hea r som(' otht"r mt'anin!
Ibid,
COlldwilJ1I
12 7
history (as world process) in G r~ k thoug ht vs. the rectilinear patterns of them for Judaeo-C hristian thoug ht; (2) the repetition and eternal recurrence predicated by the Graeco- Roma n view vs . the innovation and renovation predi cated by the J udaeo-Christ ia n view; and (3) the hopelessness, meaninglessness, and enslave ment of the soul entail ed by the Graeco-Roman view vs. the hopefu lness , meaningful ness, a nd liberation possible on th e Judaeo-Christi an view. Someth ing resembling all of these themes is already fo und in Aug ustine's City of God. The second half of the work is an ex tended comparison of the IWO cities, devoted to showing that we should dwell in the celestia l city and avoid the earthly city. It is divided into three parts of four books each, which treat, respectively, ofl he o rigin s, ca reers, and ends of the two cities. Book II shows how the cities origin ated in the separation of the good and bad angels, and discusses, incidental to th al , Ihe scriptural account of the crea tion of the world . Book 12 begins with a discussion of the goodness of the good angels, the badness of the bad , and the reasons for both. Then , since the twO ci ties are popu lated by both a ngels and humans, the argument proceeds to the creation of man . This d iscussion, which occupies the remainder of the book, is a sustained a rgumen t against the view, attributed to cenai n "philosophers of this world," that the ques tion of the etern ity of the world is to be solved by the introduction of "cycles of times (circuitus ltmporum) in which, according to them, the sa me things have always been renewed and repeated in the na ture of things (in "rum natura) ; there will likewise be hereafter an uninterrupted series of revolvi ng ages coming and going; either these cycles took place in a permanent world or else the world , arising and dying at ce rtain intervals, always displayed the sa me things as if new which were completed and co mc 10 pass."· This doctrine of "false cycles " of temporal things is repeah:dly contrasted with " the straight path of sound doctrine, " and Psalm 12 ; 4 is dubiously quoted : "The wicked shall walk a round in ci rcles. " Among the vario us grounds on which the theory of cosmic cycles is rejec ted are ( 1) that it entails tha t nothing new (.'ver happens-wrong because it denies the omnipotence of God-and (2) that according to it th(.' soul is enslaved without hope of li beration . By cont rast. the "sua ight way" of C hristian doctrine offers the assurance that somet hing n(.'w 'Aug. CD t2. 14. 1-2.
128
/dta
of HiJto~J'
ca n happen and th e refo r~ ,hC' possibility that tlw soul might be lib· era ted. The creation of man is thence affirmed against the obj ections of the ··phi losophers." Augus tine d~s nOI claim that t his ;s a " pag311 " ,'it'w, that it is common to Graceo· Huma n ('u hurC', hut that it is a ,'iew ('xprcssed hy some " philosophrr.i ," Still . in tilt' c:o nl t'XI of the rlwtori. al alternation he'lwct'n C hristianit y alld IIIe' cuhun- uf IIIl' Gracco-Ruman world, which is Ih(" mainspri n,l( .,1' tilt" C'arly Christian a polngirs. a nd he r(" h('tween Ihe ci ty ufGud al\(\ t hl' l"ity "fma ll. tilt' "philosophers of this world " belong 10 tht' dty of thi s ,,'orl d. tilt, city of man. :\.ugus lint' does not alt ribult' to ,hl's(' philosophers Ihe vie ..·; that history g()('s in cycles, hUI Ihal tirnts (Itm/JrJr(zl. If' rn poral Ihings (m Itm/JrJTalinl. or f'\'ems (rts ~tsl{u l do, But if 1111(' undl'rs tood hy his tory- as it has m-f'n argued tha l Augusli nr himsdf did not- the whole It'mporal procrss of Ihc .....orld . lhr ll this discussiulI a nd othrr s imilar discussions r ise· where in the work would s("r m 10 installliatc tht· widcly acccpted account of the opposilion ht·twl'l'll Chrislian ami pilRan idf'as of his· tory , And they a rr Sf! intt·rpn·t,'d hy s('h,lla rs, But thf' rf' is no sing-lr or simple C rcrk 0 1" Grar('Il·Rnman " it'w of timc Of Ill" hislury in tilt" sense of the whol,' tl'mporal pro('rss of tilt' world -indc'cd history is not uSf'd in that st'IlS{' in antiquity- to which such a unin )cilI Judaf'o, C hristian ,"iew Ilf (iml' or hislory might he opp()se·d . It sCt'ms, ratht'r, Iha •• h(' attra('ti\'('I1('ss of th(' us ual accou nt is 10 be attrihu ted to pr ('ci~t>l y Ihat ~amt· s pirit nf Chris tian apology Ihat firs. formulaled it in thl' (;j~I' f!/(;od. :\'m ()nl~' was it Ihc rhetorical or apologetical moliH which n·t.'tlmmt>ndrd thl' dilftl't"ntialioll of sacred and profanr hislOry in .h(' tirs! pi act', hut it is tht.' sa m,' mol i\'c and the same apology th.u has rt'('tmunt'nd cd ,hl' sdwlarlr analysis of the sources and m eanin~ or that distinniun . TIll' Chl'istian rC\'ision of the idea of history is rht·tori<'al and partisiHl , and so is thl' acc('ptrd ac· cou nt of it ,
Several observations might t,c mad c at this point. Rat he r than the radical change thal is widely hclie\'ed, the d e\'e!opmenl of the idea of history in antiquity diliplays considtrablt" conlinuity bolh in Ihe subjects that a his tory might be about and in the kinds oflhin g or {'Illity that a history might be . Tht' ea rlies t su~iccts. ('vcnts of social or political imporlanCl', natural things, and Ihl' particularly dramatic use about episodes in the lives of pcnons of great cu ltural s tature, re·
COllrius;Oll main~d th~
129
primary subjects throughout antiquity for Christians and non-Christians alike. History about natural things or human cus toms was never a prominent usage, but a lso n e\'~ r forgotlcn . HislOry about persons moved out of the dramatic context in tit!! Roman Age and after; and the stature in the cultural community of the persons involved also dedined, although the Christian use of hi story about the characters in the O ld and New Testaments represents a relurn 10 the original culturally great stature, since these figures are the heroes and archetypal figures of the Judaeo-Christian world-view. Also in the later period, gods and divinc acts came to be considered subjec ts for history, and this, again , by Greeks, Romans, and C hri stians alike. The kinds of beings or ~ntities to which " history" referred or for which it was a name varied somewhat by addition, deletion , or change of emphasis, but remained substantially the sa me thro ughou t antiquity . The earli~st r~feren ce, to inquiring or inquiry , becam~ moribund in Greek after the beginning ofth~ Hdl ~ni stic Age, and never occurred in Latin . For this reason, too, the early reference to results of inqu iring changed into the less activity-oriented informational account . A certain species of informational accounts was ~ n shrin ed in the reference to the literary genre. Th ~ gen~ra l distinction in ki nds of entities between informational a ccount and litcrary genre remaim:d a fundam ental di stinction throughout antiquity (and has remained so to the present day, though in an attenuated form ). Besides this fundamental distinction, there is a distinction within " informational account" between the account pc:r se and th e info rmation itself, the fa cts. In later antiquity there came to be an added species of the former , story, and an added species of the lalt~r , the past . If there is substantial contin uity in the development of the idea there a re also two changes found in the Christian writings and not elsewhere. The first is that history is here understood to be capable of bearing a meaning other than the literal one. This note had wide curr~ncy in Christian writings both in Greek and in Latin ; and there were disputes about the extent to which Scripture should be read literally, that is, "according to history," or figuratively, allegorically, typically, etc. The second new note, implicit in the later Latin fathers, but explicit in Augusti ne, is the differentiation between C hristian and Genti le history. History is supposed to be something different for J ews and Christians from what it is for other peoples. These two changes are characteristic of Christian writers. But the training and profession of the writers , the kinds of literatu re in which
130
/dM ~f //isto ~r
the changed usagr of his lOry is louno . a nd t ilt' kind of roll" played by the te rm in Ihest' wo rks sug!itt's t. as a s•.'col1d ohs('n'alio n. thal the changes a rc dul' to lilt-rary a nd rhe tori ca l. filther tha n theological. consideratio ns. 11 has a lready iwcn nu!r-et t hat Ih(' C h ri J; ti;l1l w filt'rs £If Ih(" tirSI IWO ('("nl uries wrn' rhetoricians hy training ,' The litl lH'rs of Ih(' la lt'r JX'riod . too. w('rr Ira inl"d rhrlUrs . .-\m o tl~ Ill(' (:rccks. th t' Cappado~ c ian Fathe rs, Bas il Iht" Gn·a .. (;rcR(lry of :":aziamms. and Gn'gnry of ~yss a \,'e rr all nul only lrainrd in rlwlnric. hut il lso \ \ '( ' rt' rht'tors hy profess ion for SO t1l(' l il1ll' ," GI'(,~tlry of ~a7.ia Il Z Il S \\'as known as thr "C hristian D e t1l()S\ht'I\Cs" III lilt' lhz'IIUilll" sdmlilrs. ill1d his (J,a tiuns werr a subjec t Clf com m r nl:try duwn 10 tll\' s ixh'('I\l h {'C'lllllry ,: :\ moll!( tht" Antiochen('s, 1;U1wd Iflr th t'il" li lt'rott or " his lnri eal " l'X('!( 'sis, T tl{'odart' of Mops urs lia was a s w
I.."
",'i""
\ I'p, K1 0-101' . ;iI)f )W, f c'n li!!;!!,,1 I / ~I /i" till NlUlHI.. ,m/I'I'''' ", 1,/ 11,/ /#111\"" ,ig.. I\rlt'). " , 1:l1'l 1 ''' »t' I'W S Ihal h,'I",,· :I;,CI, Clll i~l~cn In iWr< \\" ' ft ' ~ lil~1 ,md lQrr lll051 a polOjl r lit"'II wr'l r rs li,l( llIin )l, '\)I, ,\in ~ 1 p'I.II::lni slll" HUrl Ih" • •h('~ \\"('rt all IrainM in rhl'I ori r (p. Hij l. Oil 1111' Ilun tiOlI1 " r r rrn~(''' ~' kC M" , lril c::(' nrph ir..s"phy. \\" jlli a m R, St'hOf"d1'1 r " l)hil"!i' ~ l h ~ lmrl Nh .. t,,,-i,' ill 1111' .Idl t"tf' IW"" " I ..r ' rl'llarus," I i,rdia' Cltril /I/IIIIII 13 I I!15~ L ) : :!2 _:I:! 1 ,', .uduil rs 110;" . 1 - ",;os ...." 1111(" I I.cn:d ~ " , rl",~tI ,~ ," ph ic 3 1 nlII I(' ri:11 1,,.111I . , !i 'r Ihl' must ,loin \\"". (,In,,I''~ rd ill :1 ""I' I ir ~ 1 f.1 ~ h i... n li'T Ih t solt pu~ of rd'u l ill~ Ih,' (;"' ~ Ii ..,., l p, :1:.1 1. C l: K. :'ol. (' r:tl lI , " Ifrml(,u~ :tI1I1 H.. lk o i ~li r Cuhurt," Ilnn-tlld T hml , Rn , ,n lI ' I-4!ll : -4 1_,i l .. 0" Ras iI: 8fM'mary Kariliml KUI' Irn- r I li" ,l1o~r 'if .\"1I.:illll~ ~ I , R",/o/ 111111 1'III/n' I/ph" 10 ,d illd: C I:UI·l1doll. 1%9 )1 shflws hnw, in ( ; r"~" ry , 11... :lu6" nl I-' \" " r~ IM''''''''11 phil"s"phy :l1u1 rh.- I""" i, Ira u, IOrn"".1 jll'"'' "IInlli,'I I)f'I\,,,,'" " I" ,. " " "I,,l i•• ,·s " I II ",,,,!!I,, " hid , li'Tm hi~ mind :Ind u" dtrl ir his wri " n l!~" lp, is !. O n (; "t1I:"n " r :'\ Y-'~" : ,\ II,I1 ... r. 1" :01 ; \.! ":I ~ lrn . 3 ::1:1-4 , ' ,\lI ant r. PIIII D(D~ !" p, 3-4;; <..!u"slrll . P"'",(~~ c :I : :!:lh, • :\h a nrr. 1'11/10(0,( r. p, :I 70; QU;ISII'Il . I''' 'IO'O~I' :1: -4-111 , ~ .~h ar'l rr. POI IQ/o,(I'. p. :11:1: QU:Ulrtl , Pntr,uo,(I' :1 : ·I~H -:l5. Harry ), 1. I-Iubotll I~ Ch""SO$I "n> a nd Rhl'w rir ," U' I!. C1!-l2-4 J :21; 1- ; li l n :!rninrs hi ~ Ira tl sform atinll of thr rla»icaJ rllcomiu lII , "' On Crpria n: .~ h a nl' r, /'(1 11"'0.( 1-. )1 , 1 ~1:l : QU :I ~I r n . Pnll~lu~ r 2 : 3-41 , l)n ,~rn"biu l : Ahan(' r. p, 205: Quas,t n. :1 : 38:i. On ' H ,r,anlius: :\lta no"r, p, :lU8: Quast.. n. :.! : :!!-I:l-93,
CI',crk
Cmu:tusior,
131
oric at Nicomedia, but was forced to resign the office when he be· came a C hristian .1! Hilary, Ambrose, and Jerome. though not profes· sional rhewrs, were at least partially so educated . In his famou s d~am , J erome is accused of bdng more interested in literary achievement than religious, of being a Ciceronian , not a C hristian . If these fam ous and influenlial falhers of Ihe Church are Ch ristians from the slandpoint of religion, they are rhetoricians from the sland point of education, training, and early profession . The nature of the writings in whi ch the cha nged idea of history is found also points to the influence of rhetoric on the development. The passages exa mined in the preceding cha pters came from three kinds of works: apologies, homilies, and commentaries or expositions . Apologies and homilies are frankly rhetorical works, written respectively for non-C hristia ns and C hri stians. '2 They a im at persuasion, not understa nding; the enterprise in which the writers a re engaged in such works is nOl inqui ry, but exhortation . This is shown no t on ly by the persuasive form in which the works are cas t, but also by th e reasoning that characterizes them, excl usive alternations. Eilher this or that. Either God or the Devil. Either Salvation or Damnation. The commentaries and exposi tions, on the ot her hand . are attempts to ex plain the meani ng of the Scriptures , especia ll y to explain apparent inconsistencies, immoralities, or falsehoods. They are nOI exhortations except insofar as the readel is encouraged to rind an ac!;eptable reading of the tex t rather than to suppose that the Scriptures are flawed. The widely accepted way of escape from these difficulties was non literal exegesis of one kind or another, and there is discussion or the proper sort or ex tent of nonliu:ral exegesis to be employed; but it was !iural exegesis that was "according 10 history. " The origi n of C hristian nonliteral exegesis is usuall y traced back to the Alexandrian tradition , which , through the mediation of Philo, ultima tely derived from the nonliteral interpretations of Homer's accounts of the gods as far back as Xenophanes . Textual exegesis corn· prised a large part of the stand ard Graeco-Roman education, of which the Christian fathers were producls .1l Although , th erefore, the literature of commentary and exposition had a religious motive, the 11 Ahaner, Petrology. p. 208; QuaSlen. P13lrolov 2 : 393 . .. Of Theophilu5. for example. Robert M. G ra nt ShOW1 ["Scripture . Rhetoric and Theology in Theophilus," Vilili/lt CltriSti/lr\llf 13 (1959): 35-45 J that "scriplUral sourcn a re employed in a rhetorical manner for theological purpo5CS" ( p. 33). ' I Cf. M arrou, H is/ory '.I &iMU/iort ill A II/i.".iry. pp. 165- 70.
132
Idta
flf IIiJto ~1'
enterprise itself should be seen as lite-ran ". Another kind of carl y C hris tian litera ture, the a nriheTt"t ica l. i!l m O Tt' concerned with ma tte rs of doct rine; for it was usua ll y on ma tteTs of doctrine th at there was d ifference of opinion sevcrt' (' nough to \\ 'a rr;l nl separation . I n this lite ra ture, h OW(' \'(' T. scarcd y a ny US t' of hislO TY has been fo und . Mo reover. t he use's the msf" lvfS art" rh(" turi('aJ a nd lite ra ry. In the
apologetical li lcra lUre, history is continu ally us('d 10 show Ih(' in fe riorit y of poplll ar rdigio" and Ihe 5up<'rioril Y of C hrislian ity. Disag ree ment a mong Ih (' his to rit,s aoou l HOI1l('r shuwed that they \\' t'(" false and that Ho me r ( :a:: Cn:d( ( Ullll l't') is nol as uld as Moses (= Judat:o-Chrisli'lI1 (·uh u re).I' l-I jMnri~ of lhe J.:od s shel\\ Ihem to h Ol\'c been mortal! a nd u n worthy ul" worshi p, Hi slor ic's ,l oo UI Ih e p opu la r cults sho w t h e m 10 he "itlu' r rid iculous Hr repre hensible, Hi stories a bout ('n ' nls show Ihat the world is lW worse ulf with C hris l;an;l\' than it was wit hou t it. In a ll this, his lo ry is inmh'c-d in Ih ~ po l ~ mi c, bu t no t in a n t'xa mi na tio n o f Chris(ia n doct r ine: '(X , fro m tht'ir own po im of \' icw, the w riters OI rI' no t c' lI ~a !( l'd in Ol ll t'X am;na tion of doctri ne, hu t in its (h'!rnst', T hl' d iscussion!> a p pt'ar th eologil'a l to the eye s of the mud t'fll read er bcca usc tilt' t,'rm s and id f'a s ut ilized fo r Ihe deft' nse, w h ~ l h('r hurru\\'r ct fro m IIU' " pa.l{
or
NUl" is
hi~ llJr~'
inm[n ·d in Ihc.'o [lJgiG li
di~U I ~s iulI
;Il th e homiletit' a nd
exegctical !ite r.u UI'C, In lilt's,: works I1OIl-lil4;'rOlI t'xegesis W,IS u sed ro r edi lic.ltiu ll, 1ll0l~.1[ t'Xl ltll'lat il ll ll', ;I l\(l t'X I, \aIl;lth ll l ~I f a p P;lre lll iIlO)11Sislencies or inlJllUl" lil it'S. ,11111 hislfJ)"\" i IU liG11 t."( I Iht' lit1:'1011 [t'\'d uf t he lex IS in\"fJl\'ecl, 1\\11 \\" hi lc hi.~lory ".~ Ih l' Iclt t~ r or lilt'lOlllc \'c\ uf St:riptul"e he rl:' ;tUlui res the ( a pa( il > 10 1)1:' Iht' hcart'!" SUIlIt' othcr mC:llI ing. Ihis is in con n ectio n with eX;l lll inillg lilt ' Sc-riptUl"e s, Il(II ( :llrisliil ll d()(."lI"iJlt '. T h!:' ci rcumstall('e s ill whid l the C h ristians d lOlngl'd thl' idea of hislo r y th u s SI1~~t"SI Ihal Iht· inl1ut'nH' o f (: h rb ti
or
" Paul Ciholas [- 1-" 011,,: TI,.. :\ 11 ;" ~ I .,.I'~!" ( :/tU ,l IlO I .. ... ,Id 7"! I t!I7I1- 79 1] ".,rrl'l' ll} u: m;nd s us ,h"l Ill .. rlu hr rs oI1rll n ,ntr:Ulrcl PIa l.. "il l! .\ Iosl's. ,J rl!; uill!/; I",r " ,hl' dep"ndrll"r ur 1'10110 0" Old "J'rsl:""r nt pmp h" ls .\IId r~ I I(" 'i"lI r 'Ill !> I {)SI'~ " Ip. 121). " In 1924 Harn.' Huhhrll ("' (: h r\"~ . wm "l ", , "!C' lir,II link Wa$ kl1 nw/l .)1" .hl' I'arl}"
Conclusion
133
history writing was also a largely rhetorical or polemical enterprise. Beginning with Euse bius, the founder of Christian historiography, the historical writings of the C hristians are attempts to establish the truth of their religion. Des pite divergences of emphasis , " the C hurch historians' task had a basic unity, for all the historians and their readers would agree that church history was properly and essent ially a record of the power of God a nd of the action of God in hu man affairs. Thus church history was a test of the truth of the faith ," .6 This task, as distinct from that of the G reek or Roma n writer of history- which was to (investigate and) relate the facts , to inform- is biJlory ofChriuian rh eloric, but Ihat by the fourth century rhetoric was in complele conl.rot of p~a ching . In 1928 a nd 1929 Aime Pucch pu blished a ninf'-parl ~ tudy of " L' Eloquence chretienne au IV' siede" in the R'VUf dtS COlI'S t/ Co>ifirnfus [29 : 1 (1928), 421 - 31, ;81 - 93, 673-68; 29:2 ( 1928), 177- 87, 633-4.5; 30 ; I (1928- 29), 7!l-a6, 223-3.5. 443-54, 56.5- 76 ]. More rccc:ntl y, in addition 10 the art icles cited car· lier in this chapter, Jacger [Ear{1 e/tris/ill"i!! aM Gruk Paidtill (Cambridge: Harvard University Prns. (961 ), C haps. I and 2] has discuu cd the early fathen ' adoption of clau ical rhetoric as part of their transforma tion of G reek filii/till . On the rhetoric of the New Te5lament itselr. $CC AmO!l N. Wilder, EII,/.1 Christill" RAt/one. TIt, LAfI8l1l1l t gf IN G.J/M/ ( London: SC M Pre$!, 1%4) . There arc also several \'l~ry detail-oriented piecn by Antoaio Quacquarclli: LA IftoriCII 41Clirll IIlbirio ( Rome: Edi~ioni Scientifiche Romane, 1956); Rtlfriat t lilllflill IIIIlnri(nrll (Rome, 1960); $(IUi PII/ril li,i (Hari, 197 1"" {burdtmi fl " Vtlm Cll riJlill'lflnrm - 5), C hap. 1 " I prcsuppositi filosorlCi della retoriea patriSlica," and " ln ~n t io cd eloc:ulio nella ulorica crisliana anlica," VrI . CII,. 9 (1972) : 191- 218. Michad McGcc ]"Thematic Reduplication ill C hristian Rhetoric," Q!llIrltr/.1 jfH4mll / of SfJt«II 56 ( 1970) : 196- 204 ] arg ues that "The C hristian WOf'ld ,ie... . . . changed the INfJJli1lg . . . rathe r tha n the /11"" or rhetorical thcor)·M(p. 201). And tbere have brtn a couple or imere5ting SlUdics of Lact' in Ihe jrmrnal of W Hiltory
134
Idta
of Hu to~}t
tht: task of ecclesiastical hisloriography throughout the Middle Ages. 1I And it is interest ing to notc that it was pursuant 10 this persuasive task , to which history writing was turned by the early Chri s· (ians , that hi story wriling first ca mt' to rd y upon ('x lt'nsi\'t use of documentary evidence"~ What had first been the tool of the Jewish apologclicaJ historian Joscphus became the tool of the C hrist ians and thence a reg ular feature of the discipline call rd history. Eusebius is fa mous for this, but it is also characteristic of the less famou s church historians Socrates and So7.0men . Such changes as were made in the idcOI of history under the impact of Judaco-C hristianil )" Ihen, w('re rhetorical. and it ....'ould be appropriate to sa)' that thl' idl'a . so altered, is a rhetorical idea. But more important , and notwithslanding the d l'tail inlo ..... hi ch Ihl'Sl' pages have gone, lhe idea of history in antiquity ..... as not an important idea , not one of thl' formati \'(' and widel y inflU('nlial id ras ei dler in th(' Gracco-Roman or in the Judaeo·C hristian culturf'. Then' are such id eas in both cultures. In lhr Graeco-Roman cuhurl'. nature ( qnJ OI~ , natura ), wisdom (ootP(a, JiJpitnlitJ) , and tht, good (o.ya86v, honum) continue to be objects of inquiry and action throughou t alltiquity and in a ll fa cets of cuhurl'. Simi larly, thr C hristians brgan in tht' third celllury an examination of thrir beliefs, in which tht" ideas of Ion' (q,yCll't'l , chorilas), faith ( 1t (O'tl~ .fidtS), and th e tri- unity and perfection of God ( 8E~, Dtus) figured prominently . On c might Kin other lists of the important ideas; then' a re other malleTS frequemly d iscussed . The relationships between tllt" two l'u \lu rcs with respl'ct to such idras an: many . Sometimes an idea im portant ill G raeco- Ro man cui· ture is taken over whole cloth into Judat'o-C hri sti;:m culture; sometimes an idea originally fo rmulated in Graceo-Roman cu lture is carried over and rrformulated ill Judaeo-Chris lian cult ure . And there are differencrs be tween the Iwo cuhu res as to t he imponancl' aItached to various ideas. Tht' idea of God. for l'xamplt' , is found in both cultures . The interpretatio ns given by the two ('ult u res art' quite different ; but in addition to thal it does not seem 10 be tht' case that anywhf:re near as much importance is attached to tht' id ea by Ihe Greeks and Romans as bv. tht' Ch rislians. Th is is not 10 sav. that Ih e
" cr. f loyd Scward Lear, ~ Tht Mtdit"al Aniludr toward H isI00· .~ Riu In llillllt Pa",pftlt/ 20 ( 1931): I ~- 77. le i\rnaldo Momigliano, ~ Pa1l: a n a nd C hriStian H isloriO!l; raphy in Iht Fourth etn· IUry I\ .D .," in PafaniJm atld Cllris/ill"i!, ill llu FOII,,1t Ctlll~~F. td . MOOliglia no (Oll(ford : Ctarendon Pr«s, 1963). p. 92.
C01Ic/usi011
135
Grt:t:ks and Romans did not havt: or did not attt:nd 10 tht:ir gods and tht:ir rt:ligious dutit:s as they conct:ived tht:m; but rather. that they did not experienct: them as g rea t mysteries, puzzles, o r problems to ~ di scussed and allalyzed. In the rt mains of Greek and Roman lit· era lure, discussions of tht: nature of the God head are relat ively infre· quent and seldom of fi rs t-ratt importa nce. It is a measure of the retrospt:clive misunderstanding of these discussions that thty are often excerpted and exa mined by modern writers as thnugh the idea:oo were as important to andent civilization as they are 10 modern . On tht: other hand , tht:re are ideas which are prominent in Greek and Roman thought but which, carried over into early C hristian thought . have little importance. Such, for exa mpl e, is the idea of nature. Given these difft: rent kinds of relationships between the cuhures as regards ideas , and given the pro minence that the idea of history has had in Western cuhure for the past thrt:e or four centuries, it is all the more in teresting to observe that tht: idea of history was not an important idea in antiquity. Histo ry does not pose any theoretical or speculative problems. History nei ther explains anything nor itself net'ds explanation. In fa ct, the o pposition between history and reason or explanation lasts throughout aOliquity and provides the basis for the con tinuing reject ion of history as philosophica lly insufficient. 19 When history was discussed by the Greeks a nd Romans, the literary genrt: was meant a nd the discussions were carried on by rhetoricians. The pro bl ems that history posed for them were problems of art , not problems of science or knowledge. There was " na tura l history" a nd , in the later period , " history of opinions"; but history here was just accurate info rmation , th e facts, or an account thereof. Such knowledge as thi s indicated was knowledge by acquaintance. Hi story was disl.:usscd by the C hri stians not directly but , rather, in the contex t of Bible criti cism. Here history, similarly, was the literal or somatic level or dimension of Scripture, and it was to be unders tood straightforwardly . Tht:re was no probl em about understanding "according to history" ; the problems in exegt:s is had to do with nonliteral exegesis . Tht: C hristians had a histo ry, found in the Scriptures, which served them as their equiva lent of the histories of the Greeks and Romans and which they acceptt'd on faith . Bu t here too there were no specu· .. h wa~ n:jeclcd a5 a rl y a5 HeradilUs; er. p. 25. lUpm. The op~lion m wt'Cn history and l"C':HOn or ex planation was rei terAted in the exegetir.al diSllnction bctwccn historical and imdlcc tual inlerpTCUtion.
136
/dta
of Hisro~r
lalive or scientific pro blems; on(' Ilt'eded only to be acquainted with the fa cts. If the idea of history ..... as not important in a ncient cult ure. it cer-
tainly became so later on . August ine set up tilt' opposition brtwren sacred and gelllile hisIHr~' ;L~ differe nt hislOries. \\'ith different beginnings and ends. going ClII al Ihe SO IlIlt' time and in the :;';1111(, place. The twO cities are sid t by side ill this world and in th e ulli verst', But the
history of the cel est ial city is provicicntia l and ils ('nd is sah-alion: ilS meaning a nd e nd arc nul thosr (lf tilt' hisl!lry of Ill(" !e rrt'striai ci lY. T he g r ea l allth()ril~' t'luorcd h ~ AU).::tl Sl illt" and tht' IlUi lll t'IT tll )It'<1 availabilit y of the Cify Iif' (;011 during the StLtH'ctiing n'lIt uries established the distinction between sacrf'd a nd prnfillle' hi stOry as a fun damenta l (metaphysical) di stinctio n in W" ~>I nn thouKht. ·.. But sacred and profan e his tory wrrc fl ot only u nde rs!Uod 10 tw d iO(: rt nt. It came to he unders tood a lso that Ih(' sa(rl·d his tory. which bega n with the creat ion nf t h.. world and wo uld ('nd willl thl' st'colld coming of the messiah ,t' which dcpendf"d for its r('liahilily upo n th(' di\·ine a uthority of inspired authorship rath('r than upon tht' In("rf'l y human authority of observat ion and inquiry, was IIl1' mcasu r(' of all oth('r his tories . If th en' was a confl ict octW(,I'1I what wa ~ found in the sacred histor\, and what was saki som('wlwrt, l'lse, til t' laller had to ~ considered incorrect, l.ikcwi s(", since th(" sacn'd history began with the crea tion of the world. any local or na tional history was unders tood as taking place ..... ithin tht, tim(" continuum established therehy. The histories ..... ritten durin,!!; tht Middk Ages W('f(' , fo r tht' mos t part , ecclesiastica l his tories, tdlill,Lt about 111(" p ro.'::r('ss of the ce lestial ci ty. the kingdom of God 0 11 t'a rlh , and procf'r"din.':: from ('rea linn Y It was Augustine, hm"'cver, ('onsirl~red Ih.t- rl istinclion morr mysticallila" n1l'taph~·si Cilll . He 511)" (CD 15.1):" spI'ak or lh rsr hranc:hts (ofmankiod ) ,,150 l\1 ys li(aIl~' i,,! rl lift \ ilS IWO cilics. Ihal is IWO socicli" (If human he·iules. 1,11' ... hil'h '"11' is Pl'mrMi nm to reign ~ Iuna\l y wi th God and Ih.t- olhl'r In Ulldl' rRO !'ll'rnal puuishm('nl wil h Ihl' dc\,a . ~ >I The prac: ticc of romml'ncing hinorkal ;U;!;01JlII~ wil h frr;t liul1 M'C'!Il ~ 10 ha\'C' b~· gun with I h~ CIr''''''''II/'III11 ofJulius Articanul. which lI r\'ull'd IWO hook! U) Ihr pc:riod from cru,ion 10 M ~ . This ... u rotlo"'l'd b\' i::uS('btus in Ihr ,'onsuucli un of hil Cltrlllliclt, which was a hiSloric:al sourCl'lxlok (or'lhl' lIe~1 th0ll5:lnd ytau. t:r. Milburn , £111/.1 CA,ls/ill" 1",,,.p¥t'II'i"~s 81 His/o~t, pp. ,S8-tiO. 11 for u.amplr . PrO'Jpt'r of Aquilainl" s CIr,o~i("1tt .1I".e.lI," pn)('l'm, !rum ..\ d am \I') A .D . "55. GrrKOry of Tours' Hislorio Fra~ro"'''l beRilll ... il h thl' rrtalion . l ~ido rl' of Seville's C/t,omu ,"lIll1rll is a uni \'l'rsal chronidl' from crl'ali'lIl 10 ... . 11. 6 15. Thl' ..... ork, of Ouo of Frtising a nd VinCl'I1' of fkoau\'ai5 bolh procffri from crl'alion tn Iht' I'lId of 11>
Imlt: .
Conclus;on
137
len for the Renaissance to rediscover the value of knowing something about the history of the terrestrial ci ty.u Even when national histories were being written once again , since all history was still understood to begin with creation and with Ada m, writing a national history req uired that one show the national lineage from the offspring of Noah."M And since the national histories derive from the providential history, they characteristically proceed upon the notion tha t that nation has some particular role to play in the providential history . Criticism of this view of history as differentiated into a sacred and a profane part began as a reaction agai nst the excesses of millenari anism and as one facet of the skeptical crisis of sixteenth- and seventeenth-century France, and pa rti cula rly as a result of the tra nsformation of Bible criticism which these movements of thought precipitated . Z5 The Scriptures were found to be fallible; the hi story of the world was found to be: somewhat longer than that of the Old T estament peoples; it was argued that there were men before Adam; the lineages from Noah were found 10 be undocumentable. When Ihe framework of the sacred history-tha t is, the events from crea tion to J esus Christ and the projccted Second Coming-d ropped out of the picture, the continuity be: tw ~ n sacred and profan e history was broken. David Hume's History of England makes no men tion of the sacred history or of the then customary evangelization of England by SI. Peter but , rather, begins with the earli es t documentable events. The excl usion of that part of history which was called sacred and the rejection of the distinction between sacred a nd profane brought into being something entirely new, history as a quasi-science (in contemporary terminology, a social science) a nd as pa rt of the educa tional curriculum of Western civilization. Insofa r as the subject matter is n Cf. l.ou is Green. "HiMoricall nterpl"tlalion in the f ourteenth Century flON!ntine Chronides, jHI 28 ( 1967) : 16 1- 78; CoostantirKlll Patridn, 17It Phonrix IUlll drt LAddtr (Berkeley: Unive n ilY uf California Preu, 1964), C hap. 6; J ohn Baillie. TIlt BtUt! ill P'n,rtsS, C hap. 3; Wallace K. Ferguson, TAt RtJllliml1l(t ire His/flric/d 17t~tlet, Chap. I. '" See Oon Cameron Alien, 1 ~ U6rrJ '" NNIt (U rbana: Univeuity u( lIIinoiJ Preu, 1963), Chap. 6, esp«ially pp. 117fT. 71 Accounts of these his loriograph ical devdopmen ts d uring the Renaissance may be round in: Grace E. Cairns, Pllilolophiu of HiJ/(1) (New York: Philoso phical Li brary, 1962), Pari 2 C hap. !I; Frank Man ud, ShflPu of PleilaS4lf1llitlri His/ory (Stanford: Stan· ford Univenily Pms, 196!1), Chap. 3; Pa lrides, Pltonix IIM LA" tr, C haps. 5-8, a more detailed s tudy: Winston H. f . Ba mes, "On Hi"ory. I.- Hiuorical Inq ui ry," Dwrltsm UII/vmilJ' j OllrM/ 8 (1946-47): 89-97; S. G. F. Brandon, "B.C. and A.D. : The Chrin ian Philosophy of Hislory," History T.dflY t !l (1965): 198-99; 8eatrice Reynokb, "Shifti ng C un-ents in Historical Criticism," j lll 14 (1953), especially pp. 480-92. K
138
Idea of HiJto~1'
concerned , this consti tut es a return to the ancicnt Grt'ek and Roman idea of his tory as an account of even ts in t he hum a n world, d istinct from myth and fable in that il ('xclude's accou nts of gods . miracles. a nd lhe like. But while lhl' biblical beginn ing and ("nd or the historical cOnlinuum and tht" miraculous ('\"enlS of Iht' sacred history dropped OUI of the later dew. t ht" pro\'id ellt ia l mf'a ning attribuU'd to eve nts has proved more persis lt'nl. Ew n t ho ugh lht Juriaco-C hris tian beginning and end of histury Wf'rt' n'lrgalt'd 10 Iht' sta tus of "mythology ," the notion that history is movi ng toward somt' goal or cnd has sun'j\'ed. Bayle. Vohairr, and othtTS "f,he rn~ I'(lopidiJ ltJ may not have believed that history was going anywhrTr. hut the G erman Roma ntics did , If the p n)\'idt:ntia l ml';U1in ,~ of hi"tory was ft'movcd by seve nu~enth - and eightet'nlh-ct'nt u ry Frt'nc h thinkers, it \\'as put bac k by eighteenth- and nin r tt'enlh-('rn tury German philosophers of history- with the differr nce that for thr ill th (' dt'\'('lopme nl is immanen t ra the r than tra nscrnden 1. Thus history has ht"l'nmt" a ma tte r of sustained phi losophica l and thcologica l inu'rt'''1 ill Iht' modrrn world , All of these deve lopments- and this is, (If courst', only a "kru:h of the later fortunes of the idea of history- an' hased on Augustin(,' s distinction between the twO histori es and thl' attribution to t ill' sanf'd history of a provide ntial or salvational mea ninJi!: ' In urder for lh('r(' to be philosophies or theologies of history, hO\\,l'\'('r, hi "tory mu st fi rst be und erstood LO !)(' the sort of thint{ about which Iherl" (1111 bl' a philosoph y or a theology, That is to say, history must bt- un d('rSlood to indicate the whole temporal proc('ss or ca n 'eT Cif a thin!!; takt'n collec tively , History in Ihi s sense is some lhin~ ra (hrr dilte rrlll from the various senses oflh e term that ha\'{' bc{'n ('xa min ed in th{' prt'ccding c hapters. In Greek a nd Roman a nd Christian writ ings alik{', history meant an informational aCCOUnl or accurat{' inform,u ion about various sorts of things. Thrrt' was a grnl'ral distinc tion brtwet'1l uses in which the form was emphasized and IhOst' in which the content was e mph asized ; that is. he twcen his tory as a l itera r~· grnre and history as informational accoullt. Tht' lallt'T ~e nu s ca ll1(' to ha\'t' samt' modified senses in t.tler a ntiquity: an informational aC(,(IlIlH ill which accurdC)' was less important than ellleTlilinment Ill' imlrut'tKIIl, history as stor y, <md Ihe infurmation abuut some thing 0 1' somcune taken as a collecti\'e whu\e, histury
Conclusion
139
not seem to be quite the same sort of history, for all the ancient histories are human productions. Written works called "histories" arc, of course, the products of human art; and history as a literary gcnre is largely concerned with the rules and styles for producing them . History as informational account is also a human product, both in the earliest sense that it is the result of someone's inquiring and in the later sense that an accou nt of the information about something is possessed by or known to someone, handed down or reported by someone. Here a very great difference between ancient and modern ideas of history appears. For while in the ancient world there is no hiSfory apart from human thought and art , in the modern world there is such history, and it is this to which human thought and art are applied . The difference is between ( I ) someone giving, writing, or knowing the history of something, and (2) something hIJuing a history, which someone might attempt to learn or tn communicate. The difference may be described as one of independent existence or subsi:. . ..;nce. In modern thought there is history independent of any knower or writer as an aspect or dimension of Ihe subject thing, person, or nation whose history it is. History thus has become a category of reality, and in that sense a subsistent entity . And j ust as one may theorize or speculate about time, space, and number, .)\o one may speculate about history . But history is not this sort of thing for late antiquity or for Augustin e. Their usage of history as the past is closely conn ected to the notion of information or the facts as human productions and possessions, not as possessions of the subjects of the history. Augustine may want to talk about the history of the two ci ties in this later sense as the whole temporal process or carttr, but he never uses historia or any cognate word for this purpose. His words are cursus, excursus, and prorursw.~ The inquiry thus comes to a second signifi cant negative observation about the idea of history in antiquity: that history was not understood as a subsistent en tity . But Augustine'S rhetorical and apologetic differentiation between the two histories and the notion III Augustine speaks of the "tourn ((I! rJIU) of the most glorious city" (I!I.IS) and the "courses (CltrSW) of the two cities" ( 15.21), of the "origin and career (tJrfllrSIIJ ) a nd final end o f t he two cit;e,~ (11.1), and their "career (txCUnus) . . . until hUffiiln beings ce.:ue to reprodua:~ (1 5.1). their ~origin and progreu (pt'orurm.) and final end" ( 1.3!1 ). The very first sentence or the work declares Augustine" inten tion 10 derend " the most glorious cily orGod both in this (Quuc of timcs ( i~ A« ImI/HInl m curSII')" and in eternity ( I. pracf.); similarl y 10. 15. Sce aoo IR GtMJim G6 ulkram ImptrJIdimt 5.4 and Df DtxtrilfG ChriJliaM 2.16.25.
140 th at each had its ow n beginning, course, and end provide the starting poi nt for tha t pa rticula r phase in the developmen t of the idea of h istory fro m which it emerges as , in one sense , this subsisu:nt enti ty. So that the later idea of history as a 5ubsistrn l ('mit )'. which is the idea involved in modern philosophies and theologies of his tory. develops from-and only develops from- Ihe rhelOrical inlerprelation which Augustine adumbrated in his Ci~, of God. An objection might be raised at Ihis point. and respond ing to it provides an occasion to reca pi lUialC' the argument of thi s book. T he accep led account has been Iha l tht' Judaeo-Ch ri st ia n idea of history was somet hing entirely new and essentia ll y oppost"d to the G raecoRoman, which it s uperseded. T ht' latt('r was history as drcul ar. rep('litive, and meaningless. bu t th(' rorm('r made it lint-ar, onct' and lo r all , a nd meaningful. Thus C hris ti ans in\,cntro thc ph ilosophy or history, a branch or p hilosophy tha t is or grrat in tcr('!;( in thr: modr:rn period, whi ch fi rst camr: to express ion in AU!i!:ustinC"s Ci{I' ofGod. T he r:ssentials of this account art' innova tion, op position, and SUpt'fSt'Ssion, and it cha racterizes not only stucl i('s spl'C'ilically or tllf' idea of history in a ntiq ui ty , bu t also general st udies or th(' relation hetween "pagan" and "C hri stia n " in thf' cult ural history of tht' anci("nt world. I have been argu ing, on , ht' COllt rary, tha t wha t t hl' C"arly Christian writers meant by history was not somt'l hin .~ c'sscn tia ll y ncw and dirferent , th at there wer(' nm widely 3t't't'ptt'd paltt' fIl s of t' irC'lt's \·s. lines, repet ition vs . uniqueness, and so rorth , and that neither cuh urt' inve nted ph ilosophy of history or philosophized abou t history at a ll . because neit her und('rstood history to he tht' whol(' t('m poral process of a th ing taken coll ecti q 'l y and unders tond to tw a possess ion or att ribute orthat thing (i.('., as indt'penrlt'n tl y s uhsisti ng) which is p rerequisite 10 any theorizi ng or p h il osophizi n~ abou t it. G iven tha t a rgument , tht' objt'ct ion is this : if I :<\ay that al though Augustine does not usc histaria lo r this, h(' might S('f'm (o r may ha\'t= wanted ) to tal k about hi:<\!ory a:<\ the- whole- ("o urs!' of a people's career, am I not ad mi tting, in cITect. tha t somt·thing rad ica ll y new i5 rou nd in Augusli nr.' s thought, a nd thus tha t ttu: acct'ptt=cl accuun t of the idt=a of history in antiqui ty can he dt=rended in a morlifit'cI for m? The argument would hr t ha t there really is a nt'\\· and op posed idea of history here, but th at it is not ('onnectt'cI wi th hi5tO,io a nd in cognates unt il laler ill the \\'es tf'rn traditiOIl. There arc severill d ifft' r('llt answc·rs to this obj('ctioll . T o begin with, when AU!i!:uslim' Sf'('ms, rrom n ur pn int IIr \'if'\\', IU be talki ng
Conclusion
141
a bout the whole temporal process, he uses (as I have pointed out above), the words cursus, ~xcursU!, and procurJus. All of them derive from curro, to run; thus cursU! means basically a running or course as the way , path, or passage run , a nd thus it comes to be used figu rati vely for the cou rse (direction, way) of ho noTS ," ballles,2fI life,2!I o r, more vaguely, of thingsJO and of times, the CUrJUS tnn/Jf1rum ,'1 which is precisely the phrase that Augustine himself uses a t the o utset of the City oJGod ( I .praef. ). ProcurslJ.s, again, basica lly mt.:ans a running forth or forward, as in an a rmy's charge, and figu ratively the outbreak or first appearance of something. Thus VaJerius Maximus speaks of " the origin and fi rst manifesta tions (initio procu rsusq lJ.~ ) of virtue ... " Bu t when Augustine uses the same phrase (CD 1.35) to a pply to the two citi es, translators are tempted to render procursus as " progress ."]) I shall not dispute tha t translation. But there arc two points to be noted about uses of these words that allegedl y rerer to the whoJe temporal process: first, they come from the traditional language a nd culture-the), arc no t J udaw.Christian neologisms- so that if they indicate the whole tempo· ral process as a conceived unity in Augustine, there is no prima faat reason why they should not have in the non-C hristian traditio n. There would be nothing radicall y new on that account. In fact, in their con· texts the words do not carry such a burden but , rather, only refer, and rather vaguely, to the successions of events; second, in Augustine as in the previo us tradition, these words do no t have any particular a$Sacia· tions with history either as a literary genre or as an informationa l account, no r are they words that deliberately refer to processes tha t might be analyzed for such fea tures as goal-directedness or pa tterns of any sort. They are not, in short , part or the analytical , philosophical, or theoretical vocabulary a t all . So if they rerer to the whole temporal process-which I think they do not- it wo uld be misleading to suppose that they deliberately refer to it in a ny philosophicall y serious way . C ic. F'Ir!. 3. 11.2; T ac. Hu t. 1.48. 11 T ac. A" . 27. :rtCic. Cad. 17.39; Off. 1.4 .11 , 1.32. 11 7; PMl. 2. 19.47; Sal. 21.47. M acrob. Sal. 1.2.3. "Cic. Fa",. 4.2.3; T ac. A". 39; HUI. 4.34. 11 Cic. Fa",. 6.5.2. JI Val. M u:. 3.2.init.; cr. pnlomlls i rtu, 7.3. 'I See, e.g., the transla tion, by M. Dod' , G. Wilson, and J.J. Smilh in /Ja.J/J: Wril. ,'",J of S.;"l AlIllIsh"", cd . Whilney J. Oatu (New York: Random H OUR, 1948), Vol. t, p. 40, a nd G. G. \\laI5h, D. B. Zema, G. Mona han, a nd D. J . Honan in Saj", " _f'Utillt. n e Ci'.1 ~ ~", cd. Vernoll J. 80urke (New York: Image Hooks, 1958) . p. 64. 71
142
Uta
of HiJto~~
Ne.xt , if it is admille.d that neither the language. of Airlona nor that of cumu and the. like reveals anything radically new and diffue.nt in Augustine's idea of history, sti ll , it might he arg ued , the City 01 God as a whole. see k~ to show th e providential meaning of the coune of celestial and terrestrial event:>, and this (logica lly ) implies a conception of his tory a s a whole. T o Ihis. too, I would like to make two replies: firs t, as with cursUl and its deri\r alin~s, if Augustine's e nterprise.
"implies" such an idea, then no le-ss d()('s that of Vergil , for whom " hiswry is something m Oft" than a panora ma, a glitte.ring pagea nt which is yet wi lltOu t significanct'. To him it embodi('s a hidden mean ing which, while it may bt- dimly forecast in Ihe ulteran ces or seers and prophets. is to Ix: rully disclost'd on ly with the c ulmination or secular process in the evolution or Eternal Rome, " ~ I This suggests Ihe second re pl y,:" that there is a rallacy invoh'ed in basing one's judgments in the history or cu lture on ideas suppost-d ly " implied " bUI not direc tly d isco\'t'red in Iht' texts thal olle is interpre ting, The sa me rallacy underlit's ,he ohjection hcing considered here that derivros rrom my roarlier statemrnt that "Augu stinf' may want to talk ahout tht' his tory or the two citit's in Ihis lal er sense as the whole temporal procrss or carec-rs ," SlIdl a s tatemt'n t is metaphorical, as are s latemt'nts abou l ''rorroTunncrs:' "3nt icipalions:' "rorcshadowings, " and thr likc in Ihr hi story of ide as ,~' From a laIn point or view, and lookinl/: backward, wr ('an scc how carlirr ,'iews might have or did prov idf' foundation s upun which (or ill o ppositiOll to which ) laler views werr COlls truclrd , \\'!' human bt'ings are always mining our physical and spiritual past ror mate rials In build with in the present. But the paS! was nnt l'i ollwhow o hs('uf('ly "try ill~ " to be Cochrant, (;h1ij/il",i~r 4,,,1 Cltmi(tI! ( :/lII,m 1="1'" York : O ,do..r! l'n h·tr5 il ! Pr~ss , 19'11), p. 68. Such a \'i ~w is no!. hOWf\"f'r, rf'5lrirIMIII) il1ldl('('\ual hhlorilUl$ or a pUI JII:~ntrat ion . Brnnk~ Od~ J l"irJi/..4 Sf"~r ill (;il'ifi~/J P"'/~I 1( h;lO rd : Clartnrlol1 Pros. 19(4 ), p. 3891 ohS("r\' ~ Ihal ' ·irjl;iI"", . . ~'II' in Rumr IlI r parllr!iRm and .toa l or all hiswrical lI C"lid IY.- Cf. R. D, \\"i lli 'lm ~, - ' ·irgil." (i,"" &" HnH/l. X II,' S~I/"~I" ilf Ill, C/4JJKJ :\"0. 1 (Oxford: C larC"nr! nn "rl'$.' , 1%7 1. p. ·n . " Tht cri liqur skrlChtd hrn' is dl'\'r IOP'"d :ou IMlg lh hy Qu~nt in :-'kinnn... i\I r anin.1!; ~nr! Unden la ndinQ; ill Ih r H i$I" r~ uf Idl"Is." 11 ~ Th . H ,19l'i!l) : :1 .i:J. ~~. "'iIIl .Jnhn Ouon , "Th~ IdrntilY of Ih r HiSlnry "f Ir! ra~. " Plu/nlf/l~r H ( I ~I : fI.) - II~ : 1.ouis O . Mink , ~Chan!1:r and Causalit y in Ih,' Ui510'1 uf Idr:l$:' f.'itlllrmllr (;I"/U~I .\"IIIJi,., :! ( 1968- 69): 7- 2!i; anr! " Ifrrd Somali . .. :\Ir lhodlll,~y in thl' HiS l nr~ "I" IlI ra $: Th~ Casr of Pi~rrt C harron ." ) otmlltl ~r IM II/J'''~ r '!f "hi1n'OP~1 I"!. { I!17-\ ) : i - :!.l . ..I, Irr :\( I ~ in 19-15 H:uo kl Chtrn i~~ had di~Jll:nn5l'd :. ~i miln rall; ... ~· in I'l r.. "ni.· SI'h"la r~h ip a~ " r~uoj« lion ": $1'1' Tbr RiJJI, ~f ,11, f.-m! r :Irnil,,!r f 8rlhh-~ : l"nhr rsi ll "r ClllilC,rnia Prtu , 19'15: rriss urd . :"
c, ~,
Conclusion
143
the fUlure, and earlier writers were not trying to say or saying badly what later writers finally did say.)! Writers say what they mean as best they can ; we must he careful not to confuse the two valuable but different tasks of understanding what an author's statements mean in their own context and understanding what was made of them by later interpreters. Thus the objection brillgs us back to an important point, already premised in Chapter I , of methodology in the history of ideas: that writers, texts, and ages are to be interpreted and underslOod not in the inherited terms and categories of the interpreter's own age and circumstances....- however familiar and unquestionable these may seembut, rather, in their own terms. As Quentin Skinner observes. "The essential question which we therefore confront , in slUdying any given text, is what its author, in writing at the time that he did wrile for the audience he intended to address, could in practice have been intending to communicate by the utterance of this given utterance."" Augustine was not trying to invent the philosophy of history, nor was he "anticipating" eighteenth- and nineteenth-century speculations on the pattern and meaning of history ; because for him as for the ancient Graeco-Roman and Judaeo-Christian traditions generally, history was not the sort of thing that could exhibit a paltern and meaning. What Augustine was trying to do was to defend the religion he had adopted with the weapons at his command. That the rhetorical motif of two cities and two histories was used by later writers in such a way that history came to he that sort of thing, came 10 be conceived as a subsistent entity, does not mean he himself actually did or " must" have had such an idea. Finally, a comment on the cultural ferment of late antiquity is in order. The linear-cyclic venion of the idea of history in antiquity, 1 have argued, reflects an aet:epted account of the cultural developments of late antiquity: that the Graeco-Roman and JudaeoChristian cultures are fundamentally different and opposed. So that the analyses and interpretations of the period that are offered tend to focu s on either what came before or what came after and to interpret " Notwithnanding AriSlo!le', treatment of hi~ predecenors' st;uc:~nts as imperfect and partial answers to his own question.; on which, see Chap. 4, n. 85, syrtl . . . Skinner, ~ Meaning and UndeNtandinR in History or Ideas," pp . .a-49.
144
Mta
of HiJlory
the whole period eithu in terms of classical civilization or in terms of medievaJ civilization. Discuss ion s have tended to he either of the decl ine of t he a ncient world or of the classica l hcritag{' of the M iddle Ages. This study of the idea of history, 10 the Contrary. suggeSlS thal there was ex tensive continui ty of ideas and Ihal , oH leas t as regard s the ideas which arc the tender of communic'llion with in the community of users of a languagr, there is mort' conl inuity than change, If this is true, then in order to understand this cult ural ferment wc must a pproach it not in terms only of its origins or of its influence and la ter impact, but in terms of what in fa ct w eOl on in it: tha t is, in its own terms. It seems to Ix the cast' with the acc('ptt'd account of la te antiqui ty gene:ra ll y, as it was with thc accept('d account of thf' ide:a of history, that the popu lari!r of the: "if'\\, is to he traced back to the early C hristian apologists themseh'es, ..... host stock ill trade was the opposition betwee:n C hristianity and " paganism." But what was for them a political necessity in thei r struggle for s urvival against ridicule, slander, or persecution has become for modern Ihoughl a pair of distorting glasse:s through which this part of nur common past is seen . The: opposition ~tween J udaeo-C hristian and Graeeo-Roman thought as a pattern fo r understanding the cultural history of lalf' antiquity is nol corroborated in these pages. The pervasi\·eness of the pa ll ern ilSelf in historical sl udie:s is a measure, e:\'cn in ou r time:, of the hold tha t early C hristia n thought has upon o ur u ndersla nding of our pas t. What would seem 10 bt called for in the fu tu re is historical in vestigation of latc a ntiquity not based. on a pr('sumpLion of opposilion and d ifference-which amounts 10 a prf'sum pt ion of Ih(" Christian apologetical framework-but , ralhcr. im ·es tiga liull that can recognize where there is mort' of tradition (h
/0 .."'.( IIJ/i,... . E U'!YJ o~J S/"Ji,., [)(s/m.( 11 illt fllr COlI'
Conclusioll
145
a fashion , t:stablished by Gibbon, of supposing that lift: undt:r tht: Antoninc t:mpcrors was happy; for really, according to Sihler, things were very bad , and worst of all in religion. "After all ," he comments, " religion is the core and substantial element in any given civiliza· tion-and the passing of pagan rdigion was the passing of pagan· ism ."1O The supposition to which I want to draw attention is that religion is the essence of civilization. For it is not a Graeco-Roman supposition . In fact the one striking difference that has turned up in thne pages between Graeco-Roman and Judaeo-Christian culture is the almost obsessive interest of the latter in religious matters, and in matters of broadt:r social, political, and cultural concern only insofar as they rdatt: to religion. If tht:re is a fundamental change in Western culture brought about by the triumph of Christianity, it is this: that the leading motive of all cu lture Im:amt religion!!
I4c/ arlll (A'!f1icl ejClauir Pagallu m alld CltriJtiQlljl] (Cambridge: Camllridge Univenit y p~ ,
1923), p. viii. - Ibid ., p . ~. 1. A. D. Nod: (CfllvtrJjo" (London: Oxford Universi ty Press, 1933: 1961), pp. 160-63J, realized Ihe rundamenlal dirrerence between what " religion·' meant tn the G~ks and Romans and what it mean. toJudaeo-Chrillianit}". Auguuint is the cru· cial figure in the cultural history orJale an tiquity !x:cause ht both crtattd and legiti· mi·r.ed the synthtsis of the Gratco-Roman and JudatO-Chrislian cultures that direclly formed medieval Eumpt"an cultu re a nd Ihus indil"t'!ed y rorms our own. In H.·1. Mar· mu's Sai"t AlIglIJti~ d /Qft" dt III ",/llIrt UliqlU (Paro: Hocard, 1938), the most innuen· tial mod~rn study or Auguslinr:'s thought in n:lation to classical culture, it is rtfX"aledly observM Iha! all euitul"t'! is to be rdigious: e.g., " tht rigid subordination or all manirestatioos or spirit to the religious end that dominates the entire doctrine or culture" (p. 510) or " the care to subordinatt a ll cuhur~ 10 the only ne<:essary, the I'tli~ious r:nd~ (p. 518). But tht rrligiocent rism in Christian r: ulture ....·as nOI invr:nlcd by Augunine; it may apprar 10 us sprcial in his thought b«:ause ht is the first 10 explicitly acrrpl, in the lk doctrillQ cbriJlilUllJ, the " pagan" ans and scirncn and to claim ror thrm an essential runction in the propagation orChriSl ianity.
Appendix: Bibliography of Works on the Accepted View of the Idea of History in Antiquity
A.
GENERAl.
Armstrong. A. H ., and Markus , R. A. Christian Faith. and Greek Philosophy. New York: Sheed and Ward , 1964. Baillie, John. TIu Beliif in ProgrtH, especially Chap. 2. New York: Scribner's, 1950. Chroust, Anlon-Hermann. "The Relation of Religion to History in Early Christian Thought." The Thomist 18 (1955) :61-70. A particularly thol"Ough and succinct statement of the accepted vIew.
Cannolly, James M . lIuman History and tlft Word of God, C hap. I. New York : Macmillan , 1963~4 . Danielou , Jean . "The Conception of History in the Christian Tradition ." Papm O/tlll Ecumtnicallnslitutt 5 ( 1950), pp. 67-79; reprinted, Journal of Religion 30 (1950): 171 -79. Dawson. C hristopher. "The C hristian View of History:' BlackjriarJ 32 (195 1): 312- 27 . Green , William M . "Augustine on the Teaching or HislOry." Univmil)' of California Publication; in C/QJJical Philology, Vol. 12, No. la, pp. 315-32. Cuthrie, Harvey H . God and HiJtory in lht Old Teslammt, New York: Seabury Press, 1960. Harbison , Elmore Harris. Chmtianity and HUlory. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1964. An excellent l;ummary or the recent discussion is ro und in Chap. 2, pp. 35-52. Hardy, E. R. , Jr. "Christianity and Hiuory." Theology 40 ( 1940) : 14- 25, 104- 11 .
Rihliograph),
118
HalOOrn, H ajo. "C r~ ~ k and Modrrn Concepts of History ," J ournal of Iht Hu tory of /deas 10 ( 1949): 3- 13. J ohnslOn, E. I. " How the Gretks and Romans Regarded Hislor)'." Cmct and Romt 3 ( 1933-34) : 38-43. Labcrthonn iere. Lucien . " Dieu d'Aristote, Dieu d e !'i'cole, Dieu des Chretiens." Archivio di Filosojia 2 ( 1933 ): 3- 36. LaPiane, Ceorgc . "Theology of Hi!Olory." In The intaputation of His/Dry, edited hy Joseph R. Strayer. pp . 149-86. Princclon : Pri nceton U ni versity Press, 1943. Mcllltyre. John . Tnt Ch ristian Doe/rint of lIis lo~,. Edinburgh : Oliv!!r and Boyd , 1957. Musu rillo, H. " Hi s lO~' and Svmbol. " Theological SluditJ 18 ( 1957), 357-86. Papaioa nnoll , KOS I3S. ":"'i awre and HislOry in the Creek Conception of the Cosmos." Diognlts No. 25 ( 1959) : 1- 27. Priess , T . "The Vision of History in the New Testament. " PafHrs oJ tht Ecu.mtnical lnstitut, 5 (1950) : 48-66 . Quispel , C . "Zeit und Gesc:hichtc: im anli kr C hristen tum ." In Man olld Timt , Poptrs from {ht £rOllo$ Ytarbooks. pp. 85- 107. Lo ndon, 1958. Reinhardt. Kar!' " Philosophy and History a mong the G rt"t'ks." Grttct olld Romt N.S. I ( 1954): 82-90. Roberts, Tom A. History and Christion .1polollttics. l.o ndon: S. P.C. K ., 1960. Shinn . Roger L. " Augustinian and Cyclical V iews of HislOry. " Anglican Thrological Rt"it w 3 1 ( 1949) : 133-4- 1.
B.
THEJ U IlAt:O-C HRISTl A:'" Vu·;\\, 0 . ' Ht STORY AS MORIU LTN D , It' N O T Dt: .'L'~CT
Patrides, Constan tinos A. Tht Photnix and tht LaddtT . Un i\'ers il) of California Studies in English Literature. No. 29. 1964. White, Lyon . "Christian Myth and C hristian Hi story." Journol oJ the History DJ /dtas 2 ( 1942 ): 145- 58.
C.
ON
TlU I n":A 0 ..' TIME ESPEC I AL LY
Armstrong, A. MacC . "Tht' Fulness of Time." Philosophical Quarltr/y 6 ( 1956) ' 209- 22. Bury,J. B. Tht Idea of Progrus. London: MacmiIJan, 1920. Chrou51, Anlon-Hermann . " The Metaphys ics of Time and History in Early C hristi an Thought. " The New Seho/tUti(ism 19 (1945): 322-52.
BihHograplty
149
Cullmann , Oscar. Christ and Time. Tire Primilivt Christian Conctption oJ Time and History. Translated by Floyd f'ilson . Philadelphia, 1950. Cushman, Robert E. "Greek and Christian Views of Time," Journal of R,/igion 33 ( 1953): 254-65. lovejoy, Arthur O . "The Entangling Alliance of Religion and Histo ry," HibbmJourn
D.
O~ THE PtIILOSOPHY Ot' HISTORY ESPI-: C IAU . Y
Brandon, S. G . F. "B.C. and A.D.: The C hristian Philosoph y of History." History Today 15 (1965): 191 - 99. - - - . "The Jewish Philosophy of Hi slOry." History Today 11 (l961 ): 155~ .
Brehier , Emile. Quelques traiLS de la philosophie de I'histoire clans i'antiquile dassique." Rn.'u, d'hisllJil" ,1 philosfJphi, n4iginIM 14 (1934) : 38--40. Cairns, Grace E. Philosophies of History. New York : Philosophical Library, 1962. Case, Shirley Jackson . The Christian Philolrtphy of His/Dry. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1943. Curtis, j . Briggs. "A Suggested Interpretation of the Biblical Philosophy of History." Hebrew Union College Annual 34 (1963 ), 115- 23 . Lbwith, Kar!. Meaning in Histqry. Chicago: University of ChiGlgo Press, 1957. - --. "The Theological Background of th e Philosophy of History." SOOal IUltarch 13 (1946 ): 5 1-80. An earlier versio n of Ihe thesis that the philosophy of history is an essentially Christian enterprise, for which the IDCUs cla.ssicus is the prC(;eciing citation. Manuel , Frank . Shapes of Philosophical History. Stanford : Stanford University Press, 1965. Pinenger. Norman. "The Earliest Philosophy of History. " Anglican Thtological Rtview 29 ( 1947) : 238-41 .
E.
ON
HISTORJOGRAPHY ESPECIAI-I . Y
Collillgw()(KI. Robin Gcorge. -rh, f{/" , (If /'/U(OIY, esp«ialJy I't. I. p,mLS. 3 and 4, :md Pl . 11 , I);II' IS. I and 2. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 194!i. Den Bocr, W. "Some Remarks on the Beginnings of Christian Historiography."' Studia Pa(n's(;ca 4 :348-62. Downer, Clanville. ''The Pers~c li\'e of the Early Church Historians," Cud, Roman, and B'y<.an(ine Studies 6 ( 1965): 57- 70. Milburn. R. L. p, Early Christian InltrprelalioTlj of Hislo'..'f. Lo ndon : A. and C. Black, 1954. Shotwell , .lames T. "C hristianity and History ." Journal of Philosophy, P~1C"ology and Scirntijic ,\fe/hod 18 ( 1920): 85- 94, I1 3- 20, 14 1-50.
F.
FOR THE ACCEPTt: !) V II'; \\' FROM TtlE
.Jt:WISII ST,\ !'\:O I'OINT
Polish, David . Th, Eltrnal Dissenl, especially C hap . 9, London: Abclard- Schuman, 1961.
Index Locorum
T
HE f.VIO£ NCE for the thesis developed in this study t:ullsists principally of actual ll.'ieS of mopEiv, UTTOpW, hufmia , itnd the like by
ancient authors. The I ndex that follo .....s tabulates all passages cill..! . in this study. If is divided into Gn:ek and Latin authors. Every passage indexed is cited at least once; some more than once. Citations followed by an astelisk (*) do not (omain occurrences of U:rropfiv,lcrrop(.o., Itisturia. and so fort h .
GREEK AUTHORS
Aesch. Ag. Eum.
PV Act.
Pill(, Alex. Aph . /" MtliJph .
In Sn lS.
Antig. Ap. App. RCn/, Hist.
Pm,!
Arist. A.Pr. Ca,l.
Aeschylus. Agar1llfnnon 676--80 Ellmt'nidts 455. Prm"t tJ"uJ Vinelus 632.
Aetius. Pltla ln 5 .7 [DC 419, 12- 18].
Alexander of Aphrodisias. I n Ari(toft'/if Mtto.pll),sirn Camml'lltmm [CAG Vol. I J
9,6; 16, 18; 23. 12; 41.17; 42. 22; 42. 25; 5 1, 12; 52.10; 60. 8; 120. I. 120. 6; 120. 15-17. In Ari.stolt'lis MflnmJlogirunml/ibros Commmlal'w [CAG Vo!. Ill . Pars III 3 1. 7-8; 31 . 21-22; 32, 11- 18: 37.5-9: 40. 2~2'1 ; 57. 2- 3: 57. ~5-28. In lib",", dl' SmJ11 Cmnmfnturillm [CAG Vo!. () I, Pars 1] 4. 13-17; 12, H- 12; 72, 3-4. Amigollus of Carystus [etl. Beckmalln J. pp. 6, 27,80, 159. 180. 192. 194. 197. 199.202. 205.207. Appullonides Fr. 2 [T,CP (."<1 . A. NauckJ. Appian. Bello (;if,ilia 9.67.281 .
His/aritlt' 12.103. Prof/alio 12.
Aristotle. Amli}'(ica Priom 46a24-27. 0 1' Carlo 298b2.
111111'\ l .rH'm 1111/
/),. ;1"ill/(/ IUt.. ~1. /)/' (;l'm'ml;IJI/I' A 11;111(11;11/1/ 7 I ()h~ 1- :-12: 7 I 7:t~:-I-:H :
iHlalfl: 72~ hl :\-- I ..1; i' lfl" t:~: 74I1al:, : / ;, lIh:\I: n :\h I 7: /flla Ill: ili:\hlli. IIA 1-'/.
I'll. Ilr.,p. Ill,. ...h r.
{./,irl. Alhall. ( :. Will.
I Ill". 1'" ,.h. ,. \ tht'lI .
Alhena ~ .
ChI'.
nao.:hd.
f:ph,. Basil Ill'xII/,1II.
CaedJ.
1Ii.I/ul"/lI ; \ II ;lIIlIlilllll I ~'lall - l :\.
Or'
P /(fIIli.1 1'l1 Hh2/-
2H. 1'/H'l i/"{/ I-F,I .. :\:-l-/)ti. 1.. 1:19al/-2~ '. /)" Ur.I/);m llfllll' ·177 a11-7. ·17Ha2i-:!H. 47Mb I. 101I'/1II1f11 I :t,~ ij);\ll-:\!!. I :\(if )a:-{;\-i . :\rriall . 1':11;,'1..,; /) i~I""I(/,i/l//f",1 2. 1. 1.:!X: !!. l !I.;",: 2. 1!1.7- JI : 2 .21.111: :\.7. 1. ;\11 1;II I;t~i 11....
111. 1: IH. :-\: 2:1.. 1. I Jr· /II,."nm /i",u' \ ·,.,./li :\:,./ : :10. 1. :\lilt'll:tl'US k d . (; . Kaii.>t'1. :\ m ls. (l.eipzilr Tt'ubner. ,.1. ,),,"( ' -I): -1. "--' : I ;.:II " - - -:)u u: I ....uu "'- - 11"11 . • . ;1 . _1 1 f' : ""') . • -11.", I :Uilt:,I }-E: ' ·I .lil:,I\ .. ().IME. :\ t hc-1laW )), IS. '/ ' . ')" • . "_ I'I . '11, _ • . / ' r" ( .(//HII",III Uat"dn lidl'S. Omlm oll/Im KI'IIII'.I
1~'lli/l;1i1ll
I\; t.~ il
!I. I!I.
1'1' ( ~ lt'SOl fl'a .
111111/;1"11' ;'/ I kU/I'I/I,'nm 11'(; 291 23 1:t\( :). t.R \49:\ 1. :\.Ii IH:"I( :I,·1.:\ IH'IA). · 1 .r'l ~ r2:\ J. .1.1; f!I:\B I, fi.21120D], K,K 11" IIlI, ( ~ It '{'il ill s It'( l. Oli'lIlo("1I
( I.c:i p / i~ :
Tt'llhnC-I", IqUil]
1 :!·1. :~.
C:l lIistr.
,\1111. Ch,lfl'S Cle ll 1. :\1 .
Pm,r.
.'i''''I/I,.
( :"l1isll, IIHS Il'( 1.
"'a ~ .. t'r (I .l'ipzi/<: : J't'lIhm: r, l ~i l ) l .
SIIIII/'".,IIII / h'\r,.iIJlilllll'J 5.
CIt;u'C-S or ~JjI~·lelll'lt.'d . .Iamh,·, Fill ;. It;)] Ft". ;). e lt-lIIl'lIl Ill' ;\kxan(\ri;l . "" "_ I," •}.'\1 ', . 'I_ ..'-\,.) ' ,) g. I ,/"li " '.lt' .'} .... . .' I ", .} ..'F,) ... M ." . ~ .,.,,, "._. / ' IfllI :!.:\~I.( ....; : : H ~ "' . Ii . X: :H :'U : .I.... K.:!: 45,1.:\ : 4.5/ .:\ ; :"1 . ," 1: 1•I• "illrlllllll" 1.1 Ji: I.I ;t.tl~ l : 711 .. I!! : I.:! 1.1 11 I. 1!!2. H~ , ·1. I"_ - I', . -I.' I . " _" ~. ,-,'." ! I.~ .I• 1·., , ~ .... , ..• "" -' . _ 11111'" . . , <)'1'1 ~ . ~ •• "'H' ,"l • 11 .,"1. "I .•" ', _ .• . -t . -I . ' I I'••.-1.I• I . I" 11" • "I .•. '. H• Hi. :!.1. :!ti: ti. IO.HU :
li.II .!"'.
11Il1f'X UKOl'/11I/
e)'T.
AI.
1",Lu£. InJo.
D.e. Dem. Cor. Democr.
D.H. Amm. J. 2 Alii. Rom. Pomp. Rh. TII . Did . hi D.
Dion . Thr.
Sen . D.L.
Eur. Ion.
Cyril of Alexand ria. Comm,,,tarius;,, LUCQIII [PG 721684D. Commtlltarillm ill Enwg,liwn luannit [PG 73 )1660; 228A. B; 325C; 3371\ ; 684D; 9f,oc; 96 IB. Dio Cassius 7.25. 1: 7.25.6: 37. 17.1 ; 40.63.4; 54 .23. I; 56.18. 1; 57.24.6 ; 59.22.5; 66.9.4; 67.8. 1: i2.4.7; 72.7.2 ; 72. 18.3; 72 .23.2. Demosl henes. Dr CorOlla 144. DemocrilUs [D-K;J FT. (68) 8 299. l)ion ysius of Halicarnassus. EpidllllIOdA'",MI'I.41n /,2 1.3 ; 1.4 ; 1. 11 : 2.2 ; 2 .15. All/iquitatt'!J R umarm,. 5. 17.3; 5.17.4 ; 5.56. 1. EpislrJla ad Pumpehlln 3.1; 3.6 : 3.8: 3. 13: 3. 14 . Ars Rilr/orica 11. 2. Or ril urydid, 2. 5, 7. 9, 16. 24, 4 1. Didymus. COmlntt!laT)' Oil Onnosthmts led. DieJs and Schuoort (Berlin, 19(4)] 12, 47. Dionysius Thrax , Or Arlt Grammotim [cd , Uhlig (Leipzig. 1883) = Crmmllatici GrMci, Vol. IJ P.dra. I. Scholia ;" Dio"Ylii TJim ri.s A,.!rm Cmmmalicalll [cd . Uilgard (Leipzig: Teuhner, 19tH) = Gramlll(llici Cmrci. Vu!. I, Pa rs III J 14 , 19: 303, 4 : 470. 4. Diogenes Laenius 8.h: 5.'16-50. Euripidcs.
IT
Ion 154i . Ipltigmia Tal/rim 143 1.
Hd
H l'/nw 1:i7 1.
0,.
O'·"~ /('l
hEus. Or,". E t,. H .E.
Or. COilS' . Pr. Consl. VConSI.
380.
T rfX1dts 26 1. Eusebius of Caesa,'ea. V,.mo "~tmt;u t.'tl(wgr!i({/ Y. I .3. Hiitoria Ecc/rsiaJtira 1.1 : 1. 2: 1.3; 1.4 ; 1.5; 1.7 ; 1.8; 1.1 0: 1.11 ; 1.1 2; 2.praef. : I:!. I ; 3 .'1 ; 3.6: :l.H: 6 . 11 ; 7. 18; 8 .2; 8.9. Ora/ioll O[Cotlsl(mtillr 16.26. Pra i.sr of Constatllillr 7. 10 . Vita Corutmllilli 1. 23, 2.22. 4.7.
/111/1'.\ J.11{ ·Oflllll
I :'-1
r/,,,
lOa!. • • OlPll<; · UfJUTT .
(;.rlcn {i n f\ ;\ r! lJcidlgriiht'1'. Di" (;"it'(·hi.• ,Jirikl'f.ll'h 1111' (Ue !"!in: Weid ilia 1111 . I 9:\n) ).
, . _. . - ,-;)-."'IJ . IT(Pl. (llP'T}{J'(WV Tm<; U{J'CI"yW-YOl<; ;II<}<)I" •. _ . _ . ;l, 'TT(pi TT)<; O!JlUrT'T}<; o4>li(J(we;; [!Ii, !I- II: ['211. 2:\1• I I- I''1,_" I• <}~ <)U . '\1 _1 •.I1 - I1 • , ),.'"' . . .'I" . 1, I"· _ 0, 1,,_ -I .I', 1')i.
({(JOY·
' I'TT'TT: E'TTlS .
1-:11/-
~U ) .
~UJu)'ti1y'T}
ti
i.OTpI}<; I!II. ~!I-:\:\ : [UO. [7- :10). (Le;; Ti) ' hrITOK lmou<; E1nS'T}IJ.LWv im0iJ.vlliJ.U I~ :\ 7.
H;- nq. . I 'TT'TT .dnJcr. O! vI}.
(~e;;
TU ' 11T'TTuKpaTuu<; 1T(Pi.
il'TTotL1ITlJ.L0' 112H, 12- 201 .
tn)ll9.
(;l'Iasius.
Hdn .
Hen)(iian.
'TTEpi (1\)VOi(rEw<;
cbop~.uiKWV
1147, 2/- :\1) .
1I1.•/lI l'ill E"'-/I'.li(/,\lirtl :1 . 17 .:\-:; , 2K, 29-;W : :UI.3; :UI. I.
Hd ..
/Ii ,/llfi" , I. 1.1 : 1.1 1.1 : 1.1 1.1 :; : 2. 1.1 : 2. I:; .Ii; 2. I iU , -Ill . : ,'\ .1-...~ : .'1. -1. ('I . H('I'O( lnIIlS 1. 1.1 : 1.2·1.7: \.;;IU-2 : l.Iil.2 : 1.122. 1: 2. 1!I.:\: t .2!1 . 1: '2 .:H . 1: 2.9!1.I : 2. 11 ~.I: 2. 11 H. \: 2. 11 !I.:\; :\.;') I. I: 3. 7i .2 : " . 1~12 ,:\.
Henu:1.
Ht:rad ilu N,
111.•' .
Q.llolII .
QIIIII'.(/;O ll/'.I JI'IIIiI'l'm/ r It'll . ()elomEJll (Leipzig: ·!l·llhm' l'. [~IIO ) I :\~I , 1:"1-111; li:t :". -1 :\ : li\l ; !I- I /;
77 . !I_ I!I : XU, 2U- to\! . 9 : X·I. 11 - 11;: X9.
Heradi l. Hes.
Up. l-t om . //. ". H ml/. lamh. \ I
JI
10. C h r\'S . •
:\(/1'. ./1111. D I' 0 (11'.
~ - I t•.
I-kradillls I'h ilwiUl'hus (I>·K. !·/lo .q FI'I'. (22 ) B:E). IHO . Ul2!1. !-It'siOlI. O/lI'fII rf /);1'., i9:t I-I UIIII·I' .
lIiw/ IN .·j!19- 50 1: 2:\ AH:)-,IH/ . 111'1,,11; /lflllln;,; :\2,2. J:r nIIJlichlls. /11' \ ';/1/ J' YlllIIgIJf;('fl Ic t! ...\. 1': ;tuck (Ldpzig . I HtH)J 11 . :\: 22 , 4 : 23 , !1 : 2t" 11 : :'1), I:I- lli : ·\1 . 12 ; li6. !1- [2 : liN, I :' : !~I , I : iU:; , 12: IOH. I J: I :\h. 1:' : I@, :i . \uaHIlt'S CIH'YSUS10ITlUS Uol1l1 Chrysnslum) . ..\ dl 'I' r ill.' /1I/(a ('fI., 1.6 [/'(; 4 K. 1'15 I I. JI/JIllilim' iI,' Om'itl" 1'1 ..... 111111' 7 (1'(; :",,1. I :IH, 7:)!IJ.
155
f10miliae in Matth eum 1.4 {PG 57, 16]; 1.7 [PG 57. 17). Expositio ;'1 Psalmos 3.1 {PC 55. 35]; 46.1 [PC 55, In Psalm. 188). hoc. lsocrates. Pan . Panallienaieus 246. J. Mart. Juslin Martyr. Apel. ApoloKJ 1.21.4; 1.22.4 ; 1.53. 1; 1.53.8 . Dial. Dialogue with Trypho 62 .2; 69 .2. John ChrysoSlom Ste 10. Chrys. Lucian Al,.x. Auxandtr I. Hipp. H ippiru 2.67. Hist. corner. Quomodo historia eorncribenda sil2 , 4, 5.6, 7,8. 9, 10. 16. 17.39.42. 55.63. Im . Imagillts 4 . Pro LapSll jut" Salll/nudum 7. lA/M. Scylh. Scyllw 8. Syr. D. Dt Syria Dea 11 . Max. T yr. Maximus of Tyre . Dit!. DissntatiOlltJ [cited by e numeration of F. Duhner (P";,, D;dol. 1840))28. S; 28 . S-6. Methodius of Olympus (ed. Bonwetsch). Melh . ReJurr. Dt Rtsurrtctiont 1.52. 1: 2.25. 1; 3. 17.3; 3.5.8; 3. 18.4- 5; 3. 18.8. Symp. Symposium 3. 1; 3.9: 10.2. Nausiph. Nausiphanes {D-K. Vors.'] Fr. (7') 82. Olymp. Olympiodorus. In Ale. In Pla/onis Alcibiadem eommenlarium [cd . L C. Westerink (Amste rdam: North Holland , 1956)] 43. 12; SO. 8; IS4. 9- 10 ; 155. 16-- 17 ; 167.2324; 218. 14-I S. Origcn C. Gtls. Contra Ctl.mm 1.40: 1.42; 1.43 : 1.41 . Luc. In Lucam Frr. 17e. 125.2 17, 223. Princ. De Prinripiis 4. 1. 13: 4. 1.1 6. Phld . Philodemus. Rh. Volurnina Rhtloriea fed . Sudhaus. 2 vuls. (Leipzig: Teuhner, 1892. 1896)] 1.28.34-29.1 1; 44 , 1621 ; 200 . 11>-30; 299. 1- 7; 34S. 1- 8; 2. 19. I; !OS (Fe. XII). 5ff. In MaUh .
156
I mfn.· 1.'11'111'11111
Philo Ab/". A",. MI/1!f1i Chf/". CUI/K/"· 111 Flu((.
Pm,.,,, . rl
I'lli'll.
SUCI'. Ab. SOli/I!.
SPt'(. Vg.
r. MUJ. Philostr. f 11/.
PI. Cm. Phd. PIub-.
Sph . Plh.
Ph ile ) J udaeus Alexilndrinus. 01' Alnl/lulI/lII ''' , 6:1 . J)r Il",,,,,,,;'a',. MIlI,,/i 120. 1:\9. J)r (,'h'I'IIII;/II IOr" /J,. /"IIIIKl'r,,-,,, '/llm,,.,,,,dflf' f.'n/(I;liul/i.~ gm/in 14 . 15. 2:\. +I . 7·1. / 11 F/fl Cl'llIn ., ;\*. J),. /'ulI'IlI;is 1'1 PIII'IIii.' 1- 2. I)" S(/rri/i";u Abm/wllli 7K 0 ,. .\·"'I",ii.( 1.52: 1.205: 2. :\02 . I h' S/wr;,dif,w J.,·gillll.{ ' .:\-12: 2. 146. 1)1' r i/a ,\I f1.\;.~ 2.4fl....4M : 2.5:\* : 2.59 : 2 . 143. 2 .26:\*. Phil(l.~ lralll s Ice l. K:'IYSCI' (I.cipzig. 18i9)J. . \ ., _ .. . 1 . I /lII/KUII'. 1'10110. (;1"1111'11/",\' 4UHB, 407<:. Plum/!) 96.-\ . 1111(;,.,11"11.\ 244(:-D. Sf!I)"i.~1 2tiiU-E. PoJ\'hius 1. 1.1-2: I. :U~: I. H . 5~ : 1. :l5.~1-] fI: 1.:17.3: " .I,'!-I '-1-". ' :
t' -
-.J.
~ . 1 1.2 : ~I . ' ~1 .:t_ 1.
piu.
rllllan:h .
AI"x. F or/ . Cllrius. Fori . Rom. Gm.
Glo. A/h . Mafijfll. Mus. Nml POs.~ .
0 1' jorllll/(I Aln:alldri 3:-iOA. 33 1F. /)(' ,·/Iri o.I;IIII,. 5 150 : 5 16C . 0 : 5 1i .": 5 IHC.
I),. ,/orhlml RfJll/(UlIll'lml ;-\20 8 . IJI' K"lIill Sflr mlis 575B- C, 57tm. Or n/fll';" /t1/ulI;n'l ;1I1II 347[)...E. /)1' I/UlIiKII ;I(lII' IImxllll i 855B- ..·. 111' IIIluiru 11:\5F: 11 :16B . C : 11 40C . F. .VIIII po.Hl' w(fl'i ll't" l'il ' i .\'1'(// 111111111 Epirlll'lIl11
1 0~2}'-
1O~ 5r\.
Pm]: Vi,./ .
Q.
CurU'.
Q. (;1'.
44UE. QU''''.\fi/JIlI'.~ flllIl,ilNtl,.\ 7.iO 1( :. i 15[: H. 724D. 72ME,
/J,. /m1l'rfll ill
I'it-/II/I'
n :m . C : 9 .73HF. QIIf/l·,I 'Iilllll·...
HI:\ . (; ,-m'rar 292F. 293B. 30] F.
I:;;
Q. R om . Po rph , Ab!l. An/r. V. Pyth .
QlUreStionts R uma"Ilt 264 0 ; 2676-(;; 268D; 269A:
272 D. F; 278F; 285E. Po rphyry (ed . Nauck (1 886» . Dt AbSlintntia 1.25; 2.49. Dt A ntro N)'m phoTUH/ 2 (p . 55. 14--18). Dt Vila P)'tJtagoriw 2 (p. 18. 10- 12); 5 (1 9. 1517) ; 44 (40. 20-23): 55 (47 . 20-22): 6 1 (52. 7-
9). Prod.
Proclus.
In Crat.
In P latonu Cruly/um commflltOlia led . Pasquali
(Leipzig: Teu bnc r. 1908» , p. 34. 24 . Pseudo-Lucian Ero(t.! 8.406; 15.4 14.
E rol.
S. E.
Sexlus Empiricus.
M ath.
P)'r.
Simp. In Cael. In Phy.
Soph . El.
OT T mch.
Sozom. H .E.
Slob. Flor.
Strabo T (tt ian Ad Cr. T hem. In de
Atl.
Adutrsw Ma thtmaticos 1.43; 1.272: 1. 278: 2.96;
7. 140: 7. 190: 8. 14: 8.290: 9.32: 9.57: 9.366: 11. 19 1. OutJints of PyrrliO" ism 1.84: 3.225; 3.232. Simplicius. I" Aristottlis de Cal-io commmtaria (CAG Vol. VII ) 510a4 1. In Aristottlis Physica (()mmnl lal'ia (CAG IX. X) f. 25' 16. Sophocles. Eltctra 850, 11 0 1. Otdipus TyrramL~ 11 50. 1156, 1484. Trathi"iat 4 15. 5
T hemistius. In fibro s A n'stotelis dt Anima paraphrasis (GAG Vu!.
V, Pars Ill ) 14, 4-6.
158
ThcodorelUS Dj,,/. / 11 Am . 111 Dall .
III El.. I II flOi. h l .fi r. h i ,v"h. / /1 1'.1'.
In Soph. III Zach .
Pmv.
Q. D ill /. Q. R'K· Rt f. H i.Jl.
Im/I'): Lorumm
Dinlo/(US III [PC 83. 257AI . III Amu! 1.2IPG 8 1, 1668A ). / "Ooll it fiJ 11 .27; 11 .28 ; 11 .4 1. / " EurMtli.~ 31. 14 [PG 8 1. 1125C-D). I" Ij(l;(lt 15.2 [PG 81. 340D). l " j trtmi(JdJ.4 5 {pG 8 1. 7068\ . /11 Nallll ll/2 . 1 [P GH I.179A ). / 11 Psal",i.,· 1:\ [PG 80. 949B], III Suphrmitlf' 2. 12 1PG 8 1. IH52A ). / 11 ladmriar 14.8 (pC 8 1. 1953 8) ; 14. 10 [PG 8 1. 19568 ). iJt PI'f.!l,jdnllin III [pG 83, 5890) . QlIfII·Jl itlllf'.J il/ DtulnollO/niol! tU [PG 80, 4088). QwltJtill1lf.( i" Libl'oj Rtgllm I . Q. 7 [PG SO. 537C) ; Ill . Q. 66 JPG 80. 740AI. Utligius(I I-lis/oria 9 [PGS2. 1377 D] .
T heophilus Aulol.
T hphr.
Ad Aulvl)'rulII 2. 7; 2. 13: 2.20: 2.30; 2.32; 2.34; 3. 18; 3.22: 3.23: 3.36. T hetlphraSlus [Diets, DC1 Frr. 1 1475. 10- 13]; 8 (4 84.17- 181: 91484 . 19-485. 4J : 12 1486. 17- 2 11·
LATIN AUTHORS
Ambr. Exp. Lu(,
In P.J. Amm. Marc. Apll l. Apol. Fiar. Mrt. PI(H. Arn. Adv. Nal.
Ambrose. Expruilio El't1ngt/ii stculldum Ltu;am . Pro!' I [Pt 15. 1607AJ: Pm!. 4 [PL 15. 1609B-C I: Pm!. 7 [PL 15. 16 118J.
Enarrationf.5 in Psalmos 36.80 [pL 14 . 1055q. Ammianus Marcelli nus 2 1.10.6; 23.4 . 10; 24 .2. 16; 26. 1.1 ; 27 .2. I I. Apllleius. AfJfJlogia 30. Florida Y. 16.20. MtlamorplwSfj 2. 12; 6.29; 7. 16: 8. 1. /Jf D()gtlllI/' p /[II01lis 1.'1 .7. Arnubius. Adt'"sUJ Nati()rn>s 1.3 ; 1.52; 5. 1. 5.S. 5. 14-1 5; 5. 18 ; 5.30; 5.32: 5.34: 6 .6; 7.38; 7.44; 7.46; 7.49.
Imln:
Aug.
CD
Dort. CII,..
LocVIlIII/
Augustine. D,CivitattDti I.Prdef."', 1.5: 1.35: 2.3 ; 2. 14; 2. 18; 2.22; 3. \0; 3.17; 3.26 ; 3.3 1; 4.6 ; 4.3 1; 5. 12; 6.7; 7.27; 10.1 5*; 11.1 *; 12. 11 : 12. 14.1- 2: 13.20.inil .: 15. '*; 15.8; 15.9: 15. 15·; 15.17: 15.20; 15.27.inil. : 15.27* ; 16.8; 16.9; 16. 11 : 17.3: 17.8 ; 17 .24.init .: 18.2; 18.8; 18. 10; 18. 12; 18. 13: 18. 16; 18. 17 ; 18.38; 18.10; 18.4 1; 18.4 4; 21.8 ; 22.8: 22.20. D, D OC/l'j'IQ Chri.d illna2 . l(j .2S* ; 2.28.42: 2.28.43 ; 2.28.14 .
E I1rh.
En chiridiQII 3.9 .
Ep.
EpistuJa, 169, 1.; 184A .S* ,
Gm. Imp.
D, Gm,s; ad liltI'm m impnftctus lib,,. 2.5: 3.6.i llit. :
GnI. Co Manu n.
V , Gm,s; cOlllra M allt'chol'os 2.2.3 .
,. - 4' .
R,I,..
Retractionts 2.69 . • *.
Uli/. C,',d.
Df. Utili/al" C,.,dmdi 3.5; 3.6; 3.8 . De V,ra R ,Jigi01U' 50.99
V,ra R~1. Auson.
Cas •. COrti. Cic. Ae. Alf.
Bm.
Ausonius 5.20. 7-8: 5.2 1.25-26; 5.26. 1--4; 12.2.4 ; 12 .10 ; 18.5.4 1- 42: 18. 10 .2 1- 22; 19 .76. 1- 4 ; 20.15.69. Cassian. Co"lal;o. ts [PI. 49)8 .3 [727A) ; 8.7 [732A) : 14.8 (962 8); 14.8 [965A- 8 ): 14.\0 )97IA). Cicero. Amdf1nica 2.2.5.
Epi.stuiat (Id Atti(fl11l 1.16.18; 1.1 9.10; 2,5.1: 2.8. 1.1 6; 2.20. 1; 12.3.1 ; 14.14.5; 16. I 'k.2. Brntus 16 .62: 64 .228; 75.262 ; 8!\.2t:\fi.
Ca,l. 0 ,01'. Diu.
Of OralO1., 2.9 .36: 2.15.62--64 .
Fam .
Eputultu ad Fami/iam 3. 11 .2* ; 4 .2.3·; 5. 12.2 :
Fit!.
In l1, ILg. Nat. D.
Pro Catlio 17 .39*,
Or Dil!inationl' l.I H.3 7; 1.l9.38: J.24.49. 50; 2.32.69. 5.12.3; 6.5.2·, D" Finibus 1. 7.25; 2 .2 1.67 : 2 .3 3 . 107 ; 5. 2 .5 : 5.22.64. D r intlffltionf t.l9.27 . Df ugiblls 1.1.5; 1.2.5-7; 1.3.9. D t' Nalll.ru D l"onlln 1.31.88; 2.27.69; 3.22.55.
Illll
111'/,:\ l .flHlrlll/l
"If.
Omf , I~hi',
QI"",
U"".
S,',f.
TII/,. TI/.If".
/J" 0f)i,.ii.1 \ ..1 . I 1*: l.:t!. 1 17*: :t:·t U 1:1. Om/,,,. 1 1.~7: 12.;\9 : 2(1.()(1. ()mlimw.f l'h;Ii/)I,ia/l' 2 . 1!1.-li*. I:"1,;.IIUlfll' 1111 Qlli"'1I1II Fml r",1I 1. 1. 1n. IJp U,' I 'lIhlim ~ . l lctt , "_ 1.' 1-' I . I ,11• .I'1.l/m "'''IUI"II :W.iH, '/"1/.\1'/1 11111111' / )if/J/lI(llirllft'.~ I . I:;. I ilK.
( ~ l llIll1 el1a HII.II.
I)" UI' U !tl/;m
COlHl1Iod .
/11.11,..
1.1.:t
( :'lInl lll)(li;IIIIIS. 11I.l/mlfiwlI" l.Ii. ]O- I :): I.I!I.:I-!I,
(;~V)"i"ll
/:"fl. Ilar. I'hryg. 'fm.
DiOlIl. (;mmJ/l .
Don;lI .
\'. \ '''g. Festus,
(;Iu.~, . 1-111.
Fili\str. H III'I'.
F.IH.,III{,W itdO Il:SH1. III.Xlli. l i - IXI. I )an's 1'111"\ j.{iIIS. 1),' 1:'.\"("id;1I Tmill,' '/I.\/II,.ill 1t"<1. :\lei:;tl' l" (Leipzig: Tt'III)Il{·)". IXi:ill . PI" I . 1,1. I )i.)) 11(' ( It'S. Of' 11/"" J.,'1wll lIJ(lfim I Il,(1. Kci l \.:i-ll. -11: :! [.t21), 1K-2Iil: :! [.t,W . ~ I ::' (·U-l2. ;H Sl lcl·l. Adills DUIla/lIS. I"illl 1'(""Kill I l~(1. UrulllllU'L 19 12 J. 1xl""'9:t \\'.:\1. l .i lld ~ I ~' , (;/u\II1/1(/ I.lIlil/ll 12 nd ell .. \ '01. 1\' (, 'I'J-.'\)'. ' )'. •'\""::0 ... • "..;.-1- .• ..,.;> I q( 'I • <) 'J" pp. 1.')1) ... I. " _ Ill • •'1-. • -1-.0. Fitlstdll)'. l .ilN'/" ,I"~ 1/(lI'I'n.'ilml' IlIi .H: I;\(). I : I :m .:~ : 1:\11.:".; I ;i:!.I ,
FUrlUIl .
m/ f t .
Frnllltl (.;ell.
SA
h Irtl Inat i:u Ius. A I"li,' I(1If'l1II11'(l1' / .illl'; //1 1,-,<1. Halm . 1(1I('luI""1 /.Jlf; ,/; ,\1;1/11/"".1 (I..t"ipzig : Teuhnt!r. 1863)), pp. H:i. 10J:~: 1'1.1. 1·l-20. ~ Ian:tl s ( :nl"llt'iills h o nto (et!. \'0111 t!ell H Oll l (Lci· lit'll . I!I;H )J . pp, !Un. 2~ 1 : 122. i : I ~IH , ~ . ;\ ulus (~lIiu .~. .\'111."/,·, tI";I"tII' I.K I: 1. 11 .;: 1. 1:1.111: 1.2:tc:.a p.: '1 • -, •'-'I' I ••"~'I•• I ', ') _ ••' J , ' _ ' 'I' . '• ., • • I" \ 1. ('--" ...... " _ . I c. \1. 0u .. ;'\ .."1 . 0u .. ;) , "' I.r,.'·;lp.: 4.5.11: ·LI ·I.t:ap.: 4.!W.IU: :;.14 . 1- 2: <)
;·'.11'1.·1-:. : :1.1H.8-!-t: li. l.l : 1i. IY.{' lp.: i .9 .rap. : IO. lIixap.: 1:·t 2. 1: 1:\.7 .11: I:U7A : l :t29(28).2: 1:;.2:1.(<11" : i(i. II.:",: 1i.2 1.1 .
f lUlrx LfX"unl m
1ij 1
Gr-mius LiciniallUS [cd . ~lcmisch) , p. 33, 10. Hicron. Hicronymus Ucromc). Ep. Epistllla" 18 .2. 1; 18 '.2.2; 2".! .29.7; 22.35J:1; 53.9.'1 ; 60.5.3; 60. 12.3; 129.6. Tralls/atio homilitu Or;gmis ;" LU«lIn :) [PL 26, H orn. Or. ill Llle. 242A- B) ; 27 )300A); 37 [325CJ. C/JInmtnla,1'um;11 D01/i~/nn I, on 4: la ; 11 on 5: I, I II DOli . 5:30,5:3 1, 6: 1, 6: 2a , 7: 1, 7:5, IV , n n 11:2 1, 12;1-3. 12;8-10 . h I Eccl. COmml'1llm7Um i" Eulrl ;astm 1 !pL 23 , 1085 B-
Gr.m . Lie.
A
C).
hi Efl. ad Gal. In J::urh . In Isoi.
In J tr.
hI Mal/h .
In lath. Vir. Ill.
Hi!. P,.
HOT.
Conn. Stnn. H yg.
Ct)mmnltUl7um ;11 t:pistlllnm (Id Galatus I, o n I: 17 {PI. 26, 352B); Ill, on 5; 13 [434C-D]. CommmtUl7um in Ez.f(hitltm 11 , on 5: 1 sqq. [PI. 25, 52): on 7: 13 (68( ; 111, 011 12:3 [102D). Commentarium ill /Mljam , Ill"Ol. fPL 24, 20}; 1.1 123J; V , Pro!' on 7, 19:5 [ 154 J, U Il 5, 2:1 :6 [202 J, 0 11 5, 23:18 [2(6): VI. Praef. [205C-D). Cummm /a num ill jn"l'miam Ill , 0 11 \7 : 11 IPL 24 , 789]. Commmtorium i" nl(Hlgtliwn Matih ti I, on 2:22 [PI. 26, 29A), on 10;9. 10 [65B) ; Ill, on 2 1;4. 5 [ 153A ). COlt/mmtarium in Zadlmlom, Pro!. (PL 25, 14 J8AJ. Dt Vim Ilfw lriims, Prol. [PL 23. 634AJ, 80". I-l ilary or Poiliers. Tractalus l Upn- Psaimos, Pro!. 5 (PL 9. 235A), 9 (2388), 22 (246A-B); P".5 1;2 (309A), 51; I (347C), 63 ; I (407(;). Hordce. Carmina 2.J2.10; 3.7.20. SmnQlIn 1.3.
Julius Hyginus. Al tr. Potlico Astl"Qfwmu:a [cd. BUlllC], pp. 19, 1- 7: 3 1. 18; 38, 7; 66, 6; 7 1, 25 ; 73. 21-22; 77, I. Jero me, s~t Hieron. Juv. Juvenal. Sat. Satira~ 2. 103; 6.450; 7.23 1; 10. 175. !.act. Laclantius. Div. Inst. Diui1Ult instiJutimlt$ 1.8.8; 1.11 .33,34,36,45, 6 1, 63,65; 1.1 3.2; 1.1 3.8; 1.14.1; 1.14.8-10; 5.4.6 ;
IIII/I'.\" 1.11('11,.,,111
I.udl.
(i.lli. 17. I.udlius )t·(!' Marx. I!K):;), Il l::! ,
Macrob,
~I;K:rllbiLl S.
Sf/I. ~ l al1 ,
I:'IJ;I{· Mar!. Clip . Min , FeI , Or /.
Nep. A. lr.
SII/III'I/(/I;/1 I.::! . ~.: ~Iilrtial.
H , I!J I , \Iarliantls ( :apdla :;.:I::!ll: :1.:)511: 5 . ;;!t 1 -~. !\Iinut'ius Fdix. O('/fII';W 21.1: 2 104 . CUl'Ildius Nt!pus. ;\lrihi(/(II'.\ 11 . 1. /:"fN.l,rJ"(III1I11II/111/ li/,,-; :!, 7, \- ::!:
All,
AII;fII,l 1(1.:\
CIlI(1
(:11(11
p,./o/J, Tltflll. O\'. Am. M ('I.
Tr. PelL SlilYI',
Phclr. /-'uh. Plaut.
!laah, ." 1'11.
Tlill , Plin\'
IIX l'liIw
Ell.
UtA : ':U ,1.I1.
:t:l.
1',.J0IJ;t/II.\ 1. 1, n lf'lIIil(IK"I('.1 !I.I . Ode\. A lI/IIfl',1 2..1..1·\ ,
"'I'f"wlllphll",I' 1:1,:165, '1'1';.1/111 204 Ill: 2,+ I:H ·1. 1'('ln miLls, SIII\'I';('I11/
I I K.1l.
PI!ae
FIIII/II",' ,\ ,6,2. Plaulus, II" rrh irlf',1 I :'lH. ,\/ ('1111/'1'/'1111 247- H4T"l/fl/fl fllu.\ :H~ I ,
(Ihe Elder). ,\'O/l/mli.1 If i.,ll/rill i ,20!'i: 11 , 12:\: :\;).1:\9. (I Ill' YUIIIlKl·r ). " ,~"~"I ' :1.0. ""I : :1.0 """,' '', 1': (L" ; I H-I/llfllf' .: I.: I: •. :1, I: .:1: ). 1,'l.o::
-9" I .•.0:
7.:tUII: 9 , [li. 1. I'orph)'rio ( jmll.
lip.
s""".
" (IIIII>lIIIi LI' l 'l llvll yri cl. ( ;lIlI/lIIl' u(,/rii il/ Cl. Il umli; I:III/'ri
('(/ '-'lIIlIlItll
lihml
I.Il,H: 2. 1.1, \H, 17: 2 .12. 1: ~.j.lti : 3. 19. 1- :\: ·I.!!.IU: ·1.7.27- :?H, (,'ml/llll'lIlm';; i'l Q, /l om/i; F/(l{'d rpot/IIII lib/1/111 :U~ Ill : Ij . ~ . (:OIllIllI'II /(/l'i ; ;11 Q. I//lm(ii Flarr;
1.1.1111 - 2: !!. 1.14 .
!if'I1I/IItW1II
/ilmu
buln. Locornm Prob. Wag. Prop. Prud. /-Iamart.
Quim. Inst.
Rufin , Pr. On·g.
Sempr. Sen. Con . Ex. Conlr. Sua<.
Sen.
Probus. Vita Vtrgili 22-28. Propenius 2.1.16; 3.4. 10; 3.20.2'-28 ; 3.22.20: 4.1.1 19; 4.7.64 . Prudentius. flamartigtnia 33~0, 723-24 . Quintilian. Instilutio oroJoria 1.4.4 ; 1.6.2, 11 ; 1.8.18, 20; 1. 10.40; 2.1.4 ; 2.4 .2-3, 18-19; 2.8.7; 3.8.67; 8.6.65; 9.4 .129; 10.1.101- 3, 10.2.21- 22 ; 12.2.22; 12.4. 1; 12.11.17. Rufinis. De Principiis On'gtnis 3.5.1. Sempronius Asellio IH. Peter, Historiarrum Romanorum Fragme,iJn (Leipzig, 1883» Frr. 1,2. Seneca (the Elder). Conlrovmiarnm fXttrpta 9. 1. Contrl1tln"Siae I.praer. 18; 3.prdcr. 8; 7.2.8; 10.5. SUllSOritu 5.8; 6.14; 6 .15; 6.21. Seneca (the Younger).
Apo
Apo
Dial.
Du.log; 5.9.1; 9.9.7. EpUtul.u 24.11; 95.2; 114.7.
Ep. Q.NaJ. Serv. Am . Aud. Atn.
Sid. Apoll.
Ep. Suet. Caiig.
Claud. /)om.
Gal.
Gramm. RMI.
Tih.
163
Naturaks 1.11.2; 1.1 3.3; 1.3. 1. Servius, StrVii Grammatid qui /mmtur in Vtrgili CarQ uaestjOFIt!S
mina Commentarii. 00 . Thilo and Hagen. In Ameidru Librorom 1.168, 373,382,443,487, 526; 2.15; 3.76; 4.427 ; 7.206; 678, 742; 8.190. Scholia. quibus Servij commentarius auctw tst lA I; 1.651; 3.334; 9.144 . Sidonius Apollinaris. EpUtul.u 1.2. 10; 4. 1.2: 4.3.8; 7.9.2; 7.9.5; 8.3.4. Suetonius. CaiiguJa 34 .2. Divus Claudius 41.1, 2; 42.2. DomiJinnus 20. Calba 3.3. De Crammaticis 15, 20. De Rhttoribus 1.3; 1.5, 3. Tiheriw 6 1.3; 70.3.
11>1 Tac:.
/ I/(/n;
! "NW " III/
· I ·at:illl.~ .
A,(,,,',
A,.,'jrfllll '27*, :lY*.
HiJl.
H i,lll/fi(lt'
Tt'11 .
Ad N al. IIpol.
Or A ll , 5/1"(',
Val. Ma=<.
lAM·, 4.:-\4 *,
. rl'rllllli'll l . A I/.v{/liflllt'.~
1.9 [eSEt. :W.7:\ . 15- 1fi1. 10 180.!)9J. II [Hn, 2:.....26J; 2.1 195. ~ I . AplllflKrlirlllfl 1:-"·' [pI. 1. ;\60-..{lIj: J(i;l !:if>4) ; HI.2 PUt'l: 1~1.4 I:\X7 \: 19.7 [:i88 \. Or . ~ "illlll 2 ~' [(;SJ~L 20.;t\(i, I+-IH], 28 [:-I4H, +:-, ): -Hi [:\7i. 1:\- IIiJ. 111- :'i/Jl'f/f/rulil IU ICSf/. 20. I :~, I+- I i I. , .a It'nll · ~ 1\'I a XlIllll ' S .'\ __'} .11111 ' .• h' ...1: -I. •. '\ ,).•. . : r;, J •.•
\ 'aITo
LiIlKR rl,I /.
VegCI.
M it.
H.t.!i. /)1' R,' Rn\Jim 2. 1.2. Vt.'Hclim. /:piflll//tI ft'; lIIilil(//lS I.I)rat'i'.: 1.8: " .28. /)1' 1.1111(1/(/ 1,1I1il/(/
Veil. 1'<11.
\ ' tl lt'i H ~
\'crg. CII /(I/. \'il r.
"(;'I)1;il.
Ard,.
l'alt'tTn lus.
1.17 .~ : ~!.~1 5 .
C(I/''{''IJlIIII 1 I ( ' .' ). 11.
\ 'itnn'ius, nI' ,-t nhif"rf llm I . I .:{, :), ti.
Index lndicum
o DF.Tf.RMINE what any author means by a word, one netds to examine its uses in thdr contexts. A study of the sort undertaken here-which considers several related words in different languages over a period. of nearly a thousand yt.:ars-req uires the examination of as many uses by as many authors as possible. It is therefore dependent on the use of dictionaries and indexes of individual authors. Unfortunately there is no current, comprehensive, and annotated lis t of such works for either G reek or Latin . P . Faider's R~p · ertoire des index et lexiqut d'Qulturs !alines (Paris, 1926= Collection d'iludu {a l ines (sede scientifiqueJ, 3) to my knowledge has never been updated. Harald and Blenda Riesenfeld 's Rtptrtorium ux;cographicum Gratcum (Stockholm: Almqvisl & WikseU, 1954) is a mood of what such a book should be. briefly assessing the compl eteness and reliability of most of the books mentioned . It shou ld be updated for the last twenty-five years . What la llows is a list of the dictionaries and indexes consulted for this study . I have not included word-lists found in volumes of series such as the CorplU A ristotelicum Graecum, Corpru Scriptorum Eeclesiaslieorum Lalinorum, Patroiogia GrateD, and Pa/roiogia Latina. Entries with an asterisk(· ) showed no uses of latoQElv. latoQ(a, his/on'o, and so forth.
T
GREEK AUTHORS
Acschines. Sigmund Preuss. Index AtSdtintw. Leipzig: T eubner, 1926. Reprinl. Amsterdam: Hakkert , 1965. 2. Aeschylus. Gabriellta lie. Index Atschyitus. Leiden : Brill , 1955. -3. Alciphron. A lciphron. Epistularum libri iv. Edited by M . A. Schepers. Leipzig: Teubner, 1905. -I.
flut,.,. Imlil"uIII
166
-4. Alcman . Aicman. Tilt Parln.tnion . Edited by D. I .. Page. Oxford : 1951. 5. Alexander of Aphrodisias. Commtnlarja in AristoUltm Gratco, I - IV.
-6. Anacreon. Cannina AnQcrtonta. Edited by C . Priesendanz. Ldpzig: Teubner. 1912. -7. Andocides . Ludo\'ico Learning Forman . Indix AndocidtUJ, 1...1curguJ, Dinarchus. Amsterdam: Ha kkert, 1962. 8. Anligonus of Carystos. Antigon,,; Co.'.)st;; Historiarum Mirabilill.m . Edited by Be<:kmann . Leipzig: Kummcr, 1791. -g. Antiphon . F. J.. van C lecf. Index Antipkorutus. Ithaca, N.V., 1895. Reprint . Hildesheim : Olms, 1965. -'0. Apollonius of Rhodes. ApoLlonii Rhodi; Argonau(j(Q. Edited by A. Wellauer. Leipzig, 1828. 11. Apologists . Edgar J. Goodspeed . Indtx Apologtticus SiVl clauis lwtinus Martyris Operum aliorumqut Apologll.arum Pristinorum. Leipzig: Hinrich's, 1912. 12. Appian. Appio.n; Allxandrin; Romanarum Hisloriarum quae supewmt. Edited by J ohann Schweighacuser. Le ipzig: Weidmann , 1785. 13. Archimedes. Opera omnia t um tomrnentariis Eulorhii. Edited by J. L. Heiberg. Leipzig: Teubner, 1910- 15. *'4. Aristophanes . O.J . Todd . Indlx Aristophamus. Ca mbridge: Harvard Univc=rsity Press, 1932. Reprint . Hildesheim : Olms, 1962 . 15. Aristotle . Hcrmann Bonitz. Indlx Arislolllitus. Berli n, 1870. 16. Artemiodorus Daldianus. Arltmiordori Daldiani Onirocriti€on lihri v. Edited by Rogc=r Pack . Ldpzig: Tc=ubner, 1963 . 17. Athanasius. Guido Muller. Luie", Athanasianum. Berlin : de Cruyter, 1952. *'6. CaJlimachus. Callimachea. Edited by O . Sch neider. Leipzig, 1870-73. *1 9. Chrysippus . A. Gercke. "Chrysippea."· Jaltrbuchtr for das Philologie, Suppl. 14 ( 1885) : 688-780. 20. Clement o r Alexandria . Clemens AllxandrimLl, Optra. Edited by OltO Stahlin. Leipzig: Hinrich's, 1936. 21. Comic Poc=ts . Fragmmta Comitorum Gratcorum. collc=ctcd by AugustU! Mc=inc=ke. Bc=rlin: Reimer, 1857; Comicorum Grat(oTum Frogmen/a. Edited by C . Kaibel. Berlin , 1699; Supple!7lentum Comicum . Edited by loannes Demianczuk . C racow, 1912. Reprint . Hildcsheim : Olms, 1962.
/"dn: lmlicum -22.
Democritus.
P. Natorp. Dit Ethika dts Dtmokritos.
167 ~hrburg,
1893.
23. Dcmos thenes. Sigmund Preuss, Indtx Demos/htnieus. Leipzig, 1892. Reprint . Hildesheim: Dims, 1963. -24. Didymus. DidJ7RUS. KommlTltar -tu Demos/htn~s . Edited by H. Diels and W . Schubart. Berlin, 1904= Btrlintr Klassi/.:trttrlt I. - 25. Dinan:hus. (Sce Andocides). 26. Dio Cassius. Cas;; Dionis Cocctiani Hisloriarum quat suptrsunt. Edited by U. P. Boissevain . Berlin: Weidmann , 1931. 27 . Dionysius Pcricgctcs. Dionysifil Ptritgtt~s . Edited by G. Bern· hardy. Leipzig: 1826= Gtographic; Graeci M ino Tes I. 28. Dionysius Thrax . Dionys;; Thrac;s An Grammo/ico. Edited by G . Uhlig. Leipzig: Teubner, 1883. Rcprint , 1965; Scholia in Dionysi; Th,acis Arlem G,ommalicom. Edited by A. Hilga rd. Leipzig: Teubner, 1901. Reprint , 1965. 29. Doxographers. Herma nn Dids . Doxographi Grate;. 4th cd . Berlin : de Gruytcr, 1965. 30. Epictetus. EPicltt; DUm/ationtS ab Arria1lO Digestat. Ed ited by H . Schen kl. Leipzig: T eubner, 19 16. 31. Heraclitus Ephesius. Htroditi Ephuii Rtliquiat. Edited by 1. Bywater. Oxford , IS77. 32. Herad itu s Gram maticus. Heradit; Quautiones Homt,icat. Ed ited by Societa tis Bonnensis sodales. Leipzig: Teubner, 19 10. *33. He roocs Alticus. IImx/, s AlIiws. Opt-m. Edited by E. Drerup. Pad t!riJorn, lOOS ::: Stllliin! 1.1/,. C,yhiehl, ulld K ul/ur d,s Alrntums 2: I . 34. Ht rodia n Historicus . H istoriarum lih,i octo. Edited by T . W . Ir· misch. Lei pzig. 1789- 1805. 35. Herodian Technicus . Ht rodiani Ttchnid rtliquiat. Collected by Augustus Lenz . Leipzig: Teubner, 1867 = Grammatici G,ato, Pars iii , Vol. I , ll. 36. Herodotus. J. E. PoweU. uxicon IItrodoltum . Cambridge : Cambridge Universi ty Press, 1938. - 37. Herondas. Htrondas, Tht M imes and Fragmtnts. Edited by A . O. Knox. Cambridge, 1922. 38. Hesiod . Johann es Paulson . Index Htsiodtus. Lund, 1890. Reprint. Hildesheim: Dims, 1962. - 39. Hierocles Stoicus. Elhisent Eltmtnlarlthrt (Pap. 9780) ntbsr dm bti Slobiius t,ha/ltnt n tthischen Excerpten aus lIieroclts. Edired by H. von Arnim . Berlin , 1 906~ & rJintr Klauiktrtexle 4.
168
40. 41.
·42.
43. 44.
45. '16. ·47. ·48.
49.
· 50. 5 1. · 52. 53 .
/ lIIll'x / mliculII
Homer. Augustus Gchring. Intfrx Hom"iclI!. Lcip;tig: T ('ubncr , 189 1. lam blichus. Gustavus Pa nthey. lamhlichi Dr , \( ~s/"iis Ulm. Ams terdam : Ha kkert. 1965; Ht'rmrngild I' islr lli . l amhlichi Pro(upticus. Slutlgarl : T euhner, 1967: Auguslus ~auck . I«mblichi DI Vira p'vthagorico Libn . SI. P('tersburg. 1884 . Reprint. Am sterdam : Hakkr rt. 196.'l. Isaeus . Jt>an- Ma n ' ()f' n umm~. Indrx IsaruJ. Hi ld("shcirn : Olms , 1968 : W . A. Golighr r a nd W . S. ~ t agu ilH'ss. Intflx 10 Ih, !:J,JltcnlS of lrarUJ. C amhridg(". En~ . : Hdfcr, 19()'l "" Hmllnthrno 51 ( 1938) . Isocrau's. Sigmund Pn· uss. I"dr"" /suua/lus. Stu lIgart : T('ubncr, 1904. Reprint. Hild("shC'i m ; Olms. 1963 . Lucian . l.. C . Rril l. Ind,,,· /'" bomm flf pnras;um I.urialli. Utrecht. I H o. Lycurgus. (Sce Andocidrs) , Lyric P()("ts. G corg ius I-'alo uros., I"dlx r "bomm ~ " r Friih· grilChisdun Lyrik. Heidelocrg: Uni\'{'rsita ls,·erlag. 19G6 . Lysias . D. H . Holmes. Indn' 1~ )·siaclIs. BOIlI\, 1895. R("pri nl. Ams terdam : Hakkerl. 1965 . Max im us ASlrolog us . .\lnnm; rf Amm on i~ f arminll'" d, flffionum olilpiciis uliquiot. Editt'ci hy A. I.udwil:h . Leipzig : T eubncr. 1877. Maximus of T yre . .\Jaximi T:.·rii IJisJrrtntionrs. Edited by F. DUbn er. Paris: Firmin- Dido t. 1877 . Me nander . . Htnandrta 0: pappis rt mtmbranis l·t IIl Slissimis. Ed ited by A. Koerlt'. Lei pzil't: T t'ul>n("r. 19 12. New Testam ent. J. H. Thayer. A (J"rttk-English I " x;fo" of Iht Ntw Trslamtn/. :\'ew York : Harpl"f, J889. Nicomachus. Introdl/ ftionis nri/hmrlimr libr; ii. I::dited by R. H oche . Leipzig: Tcuhn("r. JB66. Olympiodorus. O(vmpiodorlls. Commrn/(l~l' on Iht Firsl A /fj6iadts of Pl%. Editrd by J.. C . \\'rSIt'rink . Am sterda m: ~() rth Ho\land ,
1956. 54. Patres G raeci. Edgar J . Goodspeed . Indtx Po/ristiCUI sil,t dot'i.r Potrum Apostolicorum . Lei pzig : Hinri ch's. 1007. 55. Peripa tetics . F. R. Wr-hrli. Vir Sfhul, dts .-hislo/tlts. Basel : Schwa be , 1944- 59. 56. Philo Judaeus Alexandrinus. Indrx l,trborum ad Philonis A/uondn'ni Optro. Compiled hy l oanncs Li f'sep,:an~. \ '01. i . PI. 2 or
l"dt'X Indicum
169
Optra quae supmunt, ed ited by Cohn and Wendland . Berlin : Reimer, 1915-3Oj Cunter Ma yer. index Philontus. Berlin : de
57. 58. 59.
60.
6 1. 62 . 63 . -64. 65. 66. -67. 68. 69.
-70. '71.
Cruytcr, 1974. Philostratus. Philoslrati Imagines. Edited by Seminariorum Vindobonensum sodales. Leipzig: Teubner, 1893. Pindar. Johann Rumpcl. uxicon Pindaricum. St ultgart: Teubner, 1883. Reprint. Hi1desheim : Dims, 1961. Plato. Friedrich Ast. uxicon Platonicum. Leipzig: Wcidmann, 1835-38. Reprint . New York : Franklin, 1969; Leonard Brandwood . indtx to Plato. Leeds: Maney, 1976. Plutarch. D. A. Wyttenbach. uxicon Plutarcheum. Plutarchi Moralia Indtx Gratcitatis. Oxford , 1830. Reprint. Hildcsheim : Olms , J 962. Polybiu s. A. Maucrsberger. Polybios-uxicon . Berlin, 1956-. Porphyry. Porphyrii Opuscula s,tltCla. Rec. Augustus Nauck . Leipzig: T eubner, 1886. Reprint. Hildesheim: Dims, 1963. Pre-Socratic Philosophers. Hermann Diels. Dit Fragmtntt dtr VorsoA:rati.b r. 6th cd., rcv. Walther Kranz . Berlin , 1952. Ptolemy. E. During. Dit Harmonitnlthrt des Klaudios Ptoitmaios. Coteborg, 1930. Sextus Empiricus . Suti Empirici O/Ura . Edited by H. MUI5Chmann andJ . Mav. Leipzig: Teubner, 1962. Sophocles. Heinrich EbeJing. Gritchisch-Dtutsches Worttrbuch .tu Sophoclts. Leipzig: Hahn 'sche, 1860j F. EHendt. uxicon Sophocltum. Berlin, 1872. Reprint. Hildeshcim, Dims , 1965. Soranus Medi cus. Soranus M tdicus. Gynadcorum libri iv. Edited by J . Ilberg. Leipzig, 1927 = Corpus Mtdicorum Gratcorum 4 . Stoics. H . von Arnim . Stoicorum Veterum Fragmtnla. Leipzig: Teubner, 1903- 24. Themistius . Wilhelm Dindorf. Themislii Orationts. Leipzig, 1832. Reprint . Hildesheim : Dims, 1961; Commmtario in Aristou/em GrtUco, Vols . V, VI. Theocritus. Johannes Rumpel. Lexicon Thtoerittum . Leipzig: Teubner, 1879. Theognis . Theognis Reliquiat. Edited by J. Sitzler. Heidclbcrg, 1880.
-72. Theophrastus . ThtOphrasti Charac/ms. Edilc..-d by Hermann Dicls. Oxford: 1909. Reprint, 1961 ; 17110phrasti Metaphysica . Edited by W. D. Ross and F. H . Fobes. Oxford , 1929. Reprint . Hildesheim : Olms, 1967.
I mln: I mlif'll lll
170 · 73.
74.
Thucydides. E.-A. B ~(anl. uxicon Thuqdideum . Canf. 1847. Re print. Hildcs heim : Olms. 196 1: M . H. N . \'on Esst'n. Indtx ThugdidtuJ . Berlin : Wiedmann . 1887 . Tragic Poets . Augustus Na uc k. Tragirorum (,'rauorum Frag mtnla. Le ipzig: Teuhner, 1889. Reprint . Hildeshei m: O lm s,
1964.
· 75.
Xcnophon . Catharina Mafia Cloth and Francisca Kcllogg. Indu in Xtnophontis Mtm OTabilia. hhaca . N .Y.: Corm'l) University Press , 1900; F. W . S tun~. I.n:iron Xrnophonuum. Le ipzig , 1802. Rt'prinL Hildt'she im : Dims. 1964.
LATI N A UntORN
I.
Ammianu s Marcellinus. Ammiani Marallin; RtTum Gnlarum Li· bri qui suptrSunt. Edited by V. Cardthausen . Leipzig: T e ubn er,
1847.
2. 3. 4.
· 5. ·6.
· 7. ·8. 9.
10.
Apuleius. W. A. Oldfather, H . V. Ca nle r. and R. Pe rry. In· dex ApultianuJ. Middle town, Con n.: Amt'rican Philological Associa tio n Publication, 1934. Arnobius . Lucil1c- Berkowitz. Indtx ."Tnohianus . Hildesheim : Olms , 1967 . Aug ust ine. f'. Da\"id Lenfan t. Con(ordant;at Augu.s/inianot. Pa ris, 1656. Avi enus. R tiji FtJ/i A vitni caTminum. Rec. A. H older. Inns hruck: Wagner, 1882. julius Q lt:sar. H. Merguet. Lf'XinJ//.w (11'11 Sd"iJil'll (."(;.'1(11":1". j ena, 1886. Reprint. Hildesheim : Olms, 19H3. Ca 10 . H. M erg ue l. Irrdtx Verbo rum in Catonis J)t Tt rustica. Leip' zig: T e ubner, 1897 . c.atulJus. M. N. Wctlllurt'. / u{/rx VI'/"IH!I"IIIII C(JlulfifllIlU. f'\cw Ha\'en , 1!1I2. Re-prim . Hilrlcsheim : Olm~ . I!-Xl I. Cr-Isus. A . COTn,li; Cebi quat suptfJurrt. Rcc. F. Man: . Leipzig: Teubner, 1919 =Corpus M edicorum Latinorum I . C icero. H . Mergurt. uxiron .!u den Redrn dn Cirnos. j en3 , 1877. Reprin t. Hildeshcim : Olms, 1962. M erguct. uxicon .c: u Ciu rru philr(\flpJli.\f·lu'lI Sdl/ifi,'" . ,1 t:na. I~i'li. RCI.lilll. Hildcs hcim: Dims. HK11: MerKtlt'l . IIm"/{,,.,·inm :11 CiO'I"II. Leip zig.
[ntin: /Jldicum
-11 . 12.
-'3. -14.
-IS.
16. 17. 18.
19.
20. -21. 22.
- 23 .
24.
-25.
\7\
1905-6. Reprint. Hildesheim: Olms 1962. W. Abbot, W. A. Oldfather, and H . V. Canter. Index Verborum Ciceronis EpistulaTUm . Urbana, 1938. Reprint. Hildcshc:im: O lms, 1965. Abbot, Oldfather, Canter. Index in Ciuron;s Rltetoricaj John W. Spaeth. Index Verbonlm Cicuonis Poeticorum Fragmentorum. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1955 . C laudian. Claudii Claudiani quae exstant Omnia Opera. Edited by N . L. Artaud . Paris: Lemaire, 1824 . Curt ius Rufus. Ouo Eichert. VI111stiindiges WOrtubuch ~ u dim Gtsckichtswnk. des Quintw Curtiw Rufos. Hildesheim: Olms , 1967. Dares Phrygius . Daretis Phrygii De Excidio Troiae Historia. Edited by F. Meister. Leipzig: T eubner, 1873. Dictys Crelensis. Dictys CTeteMs. Ephtmeridl1s Belli TrI1;ani . Rec. F. Meister. Leipzig: Teubner, 1872. Favonius. Favon;; Eu/ogii Disputalil1 de Sl1mnio Scipionis . Edited by A. Holder. Leipzig: Teubner, 1901. Festus Pompeius . Pom/Hius Festus. De Verborum Significalu. Edited by W. Lindsay . Leipzig: Teubner, 1913. Firmicus Maternus. luli Fi,.",ici Matfflli De ErroTe Projanl1rv.m Religionum. Edited by K . Ziegler. Leipzig: Teubner, 1907. Frontinus. Gerhard Bendz. Index lJuborum FTontinianus. Lund: Gleerup, 1939. Granius Licinianus. Grant Liciniani qu.ae Su.pmll.nl. Edited by Michad Flemisch. Leipzig: Teubner, 1904. Horace. Dominicus Bo. Lexicon Haraiianum. Hildesheim: Olms, \ 965; G. A. Koch. VoIlstiJnd;g., WurUrl>uch tU dm G,dUiolm Ms Q. f10raliw FIaccus. Hannover, 1879. Hyginus. Hygini AstrollOmica. Rec. Bernhard Rume. Leipzig: Weigel, 1875. Juvenal. IUlJenol. Edited by L. FriedHinder. Leipzig, 1895; Luci Ue KeUing. Index lJuborum /ulJtntJlis. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Prcss, 195 1. Livy. August Wilhelm Ernesti. Gll1ssarium Livianum silJt Index Latinilatis exquisiloTtJ. Leipzig, 1804. Reprint. Hildesheim: Olms, 1966. Lucilius. Lucille Berkowitz and Theoclore F. Brunner . Index Lucilianus. Hildesheim: O lms, 1968. Lucrelius. Johannes Paulsen . Index Lucretianw. Darmstadt: Wissenschafiliche Buchgesellschaft , 1961 .
172
-26. -2 7. 28.
I mll'X /mlirulll
Manilius. M . Manifi Astronomiton. Rec . F. Jacob. Bt'rl in : Reimcr, ISin. Marcellus. Marcelli Dt Medicamentis. Edited by George Helmreich. Leipzig : Teubner, 1889. Martial. Martio/is. Edited b~' L. Friedland("r. Leipzig: T eubner,
1886. 29. Ovid . R. J . Oeferrari , M . I. Darry, and R. P. f\.Ic G uir(" . .4 Coneordanu of Ouid. Washington, D .C. : Ca tholi c U ni\'crsily Press, 1939. 30. Palrcs Lalini. J.-P. Mingt'. Patrologiat (U fJllJ {omp/tllts. Stri,s Latina. - 31. Pmius. Domi nicus BD. Auli Pmii H ard LU;{on. Hildeshci m: Olms, 1967 . 32. Petronius . J ohann Segebad r and Ernest Lommatzsch. Ltx;ton Pttronionum . ~ipzig : Teubner, 1898. 33. Phaedrus. AdolfCinquini . Index Phoedrionus. Milan. 1905. R("print. Hildesheim : Olm s. 1964-. 34. Plautu s. C . Lodge. ux;ton Ploutinflm. Leip7.ig : Tcubner. 1924 . 3~ . Pliny. O . Schn eider. /n C. Pli"i Sttundi .~'aluralis Hisloriat Li· brO$ l"dietS. C o tha, 1857 . Reprint . Hild ('Shcim : Olms. 1967 . 36. Pomponius Porphyrio. Pompo"i Porp~)'r;o"i$ Commmlum in /Jora tillm Flotcum. Editrd hy Alfred Holder. Innsbru ck: Wagnrr 1889. Reprin l. Hildeshdm : Dims, 1967 . 37. Propenius . .J. S. l)hillil1lor~ . / I/(/I'X r,.,."m'UllI P mlH'l1iflllll.,l'. Oxfi)rd : Clarendun Prcss, I HO:i. 38. Quimilian. [ell/ard llullcil. i.l'Xiflm Qllillli/irml'llll/. l...t·ipzi)o(: T ellhner. 1H3<1 . Rcpriul. I-lildesheim : O lm:<;, 1962. 39. Rhetoricians . J ohann C. T. Ern("sli . ["xiton T«hn oiogiot Loli· nomm Rhetoricat. Lt-ipzig_ 1797. Rt'prilll. Hildesheim: Dims, 1962. 40. Sallust . AI\'" Wa\t("r Bennett . [",lex I,trborum SallusliamlS. Hildesheim : D im s, 1970 . -41. Scncca. P. G rima!. I•. .1,lTIoti Stnrtor Oprrum Jloro{ium ConeOT' da" lia. Pari s: Presses Univcrsitaircs. 1965- 67 : W. A. Dldfather, H. V. Ca nter. and A. SI. Pease. Indtx Vrrhorum quat in Smuot Fobulis Necno" i" Orlal'io Protlexla Rrperiu"lur. l lni\'('rsity of illinois Studi es ill La nguage and Litcra ture, \-'01. 1\'. Nos. 2-+. U rhana : U nivcrsilY of Illinois Press. 19 18.
Indtx Indicum
173
·42. Silius Italicus. N. D. Young. Index Verborum Si/ianus. Iowa Studies in Classical Philology, 8. Iowa City: Athens Press, 1939.
43. 44.
Suctonius. A. A. Howard and C. N. Jackson. Index Vuborum C. Sudoni Tranquil/i . Cambridge, Mass., 1922. Reprint . Hildesheim : Olms, 1963. Syrus. Publius Syrus. Edited by O. Friedrich. Berlin: Grieben, 1880.
45. Tacitus . D. Barends. Lexicon AtIleium. A Lexicon and Index to Aeneas Tacitus' Military Manual on the Defense or Fortified Positions. Assen : Vangorcum, 1955. A. Gerber and A . Grecf. I.lxicon Taciteum . Leipzig: Teubner, 1897-1903. ·46. Terenee. E. N. Jenkins. Index Verborum Terenfianus . Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1932. Reprint. Hildesheim: Olms, 1962; P. MeGly"n. Lexicon Teuntianum . London: Black, 1963. 47 . Tertullian. Quinti Septim; Florentis Ttrtulliani Ad Naliones Libri Duo. Edited by J . G. Ph. Borleffs. Leiden: Brill, 1929; P. Henen . rndtx Verborum quat TertulJiani Ap%gttico amtinen!ur. Louvain, 1910; J . H. Waszink . lndtx Verborum et Locutionum quae Terlulliani De Animo continen/ur. Bonn: Hanstein , 1935; J . J . Thierry . Ttrtullianus , De foga in persecutione. Hilversum , 1941. Terlullitll . De paUlilentia, De pudicilia. Edited by Pierre de LabrioHt:. Paris: Picard , 1906; Terlullien. De pratJcriptiont Hamticorum , Edited by Pierre de Labriolle. Paris: Picard , 1907; E. Wit· teTS. Ter/ullian , Dt Jpedacu/iJ. Index verborum omnium. Louvain , 1943: J. G. Ph . BorldTs. "Q. Sept. Fiar. Tertulliani De baptismo ad fidem Treeensis veterumque editionum." Mntmo-!),ne , Ser. 2, 59 (1931 ), " Index Verborum ," p. 50-102; BorlefTs. "Index verborum quae Tertulliani de paenitentia libello con· tinentur." MlItffloJyne, Ser. 2, 60 ( 1932): 254-316. ·48. Tibutlus. Edward N. O'Neil. A Critical umcordance of the Ti· bullan Corpus. Ithaea, N .V ,: American Philological Association Publication, 1963. *49. Valerian . William H. Schuhe. bula Vt'Tborum Valerianus. Hildesheim: Olms. 1965. 50. Varro. H . P. Lodge. Index VtTborum in VUTTO'I'IU Rerum Rwlicarum. Leipzig: Teubner. 1902. Vol. 3, Fasc. 2 of Keil ed.
174
I"dn:
l/U/i(lltN
Vegctius. Flat'; V,g,ti RnllJti £piJmrw R, ; M;/j/ari~. Edited by Carolus Lang. Leipzig: Tcubncr, 1885. 52 . Vergi l. G. A. Koch . l' ollstd"digtJ Wort"tlllcl! ZII dIll Grdichr"l fin P. V"gil;w Ma ro. Hannnvcr. 1875: J. B. Wctmore. I"dnc V,rbo'"111 Vt"I'gilianlLf. New Ha\'en: Yale University Press, 19 11; H . Merguet . Ln:i)f()?1 lU Vrrgi/iw. Leipzig: Komlllissionsverlag. 190i. 53. Vitruvius. Hermann Noh!. I"d,x VitnllliamLl". Leip7.ig: Teubne r, 51 .
1876. Reprint. SlUug"rl : Teubner, 1%5.
l rulex of Names arul Subjects
(R1~'l(fl
in italia..irrdildtt fJtlgtt.
Abd .. rd , 1060
Abrah"m. 57 Achilles, 23 Actium , 6 1, 69 Acls of tAr .... poJllt5. 35 A C\lsi l ~ . u . 250 Ad'lIl1, 102 AC'!.Ch)"lu!. 29 A~lillS ,
93
Ajax . 23 Alcih"'des. <16 Alc:xandef the Grt'iI!, 3 1, 35 ,\l u;l. llder of Ap hmdi,ilis, 92- 9J , 124 Alrxa ndria, 13, 36, 5 1- 53. 69; C n echelil,:al School of, 77, 91 , 13 1; librarians o f. 360 Allegorisfll. 58-59, 60 Alllbrose, 111- 12, 131
Anaxagor.:u. 93 AndrollKus. 43
Annab, 45. 49 Anti·heretkal literature, 78, 132 Anl loc h . 36 Arniuche nC' & hool, 94 Antiochu! of Syracu~. 80 Antiquity, IlIl:'a ninK of the I('rm, 104
Amotlinus Pius. 89 Anlony . 61 Apion. HO
Apolog y. 2 1. 78. 94 , 11 3, 123, 126. 13 1 Arg unn: nt. 48 Ariani'm, 96
Arimtrdnu, 38 52 Aristobulu5. 53 ArislOphanC'S of Byza ntium. 38 Aristotle. 7, J/ - U , 36, 40, 42, 65, 7 1, 7 5 , 9~, 93 , 106, 124 Arnobius. W'- 9, 130 Arta panu, . 52 A mlffll , Ullfr to,
011
U'nilh all author is quoud.)
Anemis. 27 A~ianism, 70 Ath;masiu5, 96- 98 Athenagoras, 79-81 At hens, 36, 119 Auicism. 37. 70 Auicus, 47 AuguSline, 10 , 2 1. 105. 112-19, 123, 124 , 125. 126, 121, 128, 129, 130, 1}6, J 3a.....43
/HlJJillf
Au relia n, 90 AUlo biograp h)', 106
Bacon. Fnncis, 3 Basil the G reat, 96- 99, 130 Bayle, Pk rre, 138 n,owtll{. 24n Berosus. MO Biography, 46, 67 Blood-price, 24 Bultmann, Rudc>lf. 6 Burckhardt, Jawb, 811 Bury, j. B .• 1211 R),ullIium, 89, 90, 94 Caecilius, 43 Caesar, 6 1 Cain . 102 Carneades, 4 ~ Cani:'n, 1I2 Cato, 45. 91 Chares of M)·tilene, 010 Che min . H .. 75 n C hristian u tin , 95i1 Ckero. 43, 41 , -f6-JO, 5 1, 67 Cinci us Alimcnllls, L., 43 <":Iemclll of Alexandria , 80-8' , 87 Cleodemu$ (Malchus). 52
Cochrane. C. N.. 6n Comment ary, 13 1
176
J111/1'.\
fll Xmlll'.1 fllld Sl/hin l.1
(.;o mnmni
l :t. \10 , !14 . \1;., !Ii
E.lut';ui"n. 14 . :.;1-;.7, 1;2. , no 77. 1I:!. l'Ii. !In, l :m - :il. 1:l'i 4"yKUd. ~o<; 1I'{"( lla . :.;._;,1,
t:lI;ll't. rH
u.IIlslantiltopk. !HI Cmmdl or :-'ic;t
.,-
"
'
• 1'1"11 • • . _ I
t:I11I)('II, 1t k,. \.:1
Cratt'~
or MaUI" , ~ :I Criwlau~. 4:i t:1 ...e~ lI s. 2!1
bmiu.I . ·0 , Ill:'.
EPM-" 'IlI ' , ; .,. " ',, !I:!
CulhlllllUl , U " 11, l'Il!. ] ·.111. I :!!III
Epin l rt·;ul' . .1'; . /i' . ':1 4
( :uhurr :
t:l'intru" ~\n . I'l l tTTtn'T';fl l'l. III .: lI hl·IUt· '· II ~. I U;", t:.. r;l'ici(,,_:! i - l ,v .:II ....·loill >. \1. '"':!. !1.1. 'Ji_ 1fI2. 111;,_ 1:1:-1 . J:q , 1:11 ;11
illldl~,u~I . :-I : (; r;Ir:'t l 1- R' Htl;III
:and Judil~,·(: hri5'ian . -f. l :i, Ir" 1\1, 5 1. in-7H, Hi , 12~ , 1:i2- :iti, 143-4:, - his,clI,' <>r. KCII.,." I. tu- li. I ~ ' . :"'11. I'I:!-f:>: 1'~ " i. " I ' : . \It' ~;lIIc h'iit" 1" ... ;,11. ;-01 :,~ : Clui!>li
' -0 C ) nll , :'>.,
Darilu , :11t Da,·jd , W~ Ik HUf,l(h, W, ( ;,. l :i Dedus. !I-I , 1117
Ih:mc' ri ".~ . .'12 I)(om.", ha n.>li, -I!I ikmocritus, :1ti. HI Ikn,uslhl'n('s. 12, ,12 Oialwic. 5n Oia l ri'~ , 5:i 5\ftlT)O'L~. 3!'. ,Ill" l)ihh{,l. W.. 7n Diu ( :;m iu<. 71- 72
E'''~'hi''L
,.:!
'' ;<1 I...-i.....
-.
!I-f
,:;,IIit'III1 S, !HI
{:,.[a';II". 'l'i
,\"h", ·1:' , IHJ,II. !II {:..,·'um·!n , ;.1.
(~lIi\l"
Uiphil" •. -I :i U .,.;·., rnCII!;nT CI"it!t:lI( ".
( :ihh,m , L 1:1, >1\1, l-f:'. l'....... l') . I M, :!\I l'';'H~, l M
~Fa,q. 551
i r.
Drnrtt'n . .I. (~ .. :i:.
I;,,,,,,;,,. ;; (:.,,1. i.I.·.. "I. I :H
( ;' M"1. itit':luf. I:\.i ( ;''''I'd>, ii , 11I:1: .I" hll , Ill:.! ; L"l.r. IHO. Ill:!. I n, . 1111: ;\1 :lI lh\·"". WII. IU :.! ( ;., 111 Itl1a. , :11;. :11'1 _:1\'. ,-.n, .-.r" -;':1 (:"'.1("'" "I :\:01 ;';111111'. 1:111 ( 'U'K.,n "I :\,~sa , 1:«' (;' q::"n "t 1.'"1"10. I:\t in 11... 1.. ;..... 1'1\1
E,(rI",In.lli,...,. [.2
11 :" ll1ilo"l . :Ii, ~I I kiln ' '''. ,.:.,> 11" ''''' :.'' .. _. 2:'" ,
EMn, 111 1
11")0:('\. (; . W .
Ec(k~ias~ k .. 1 hislUn ,
Ill-I. I lB- 11. 1141:11 . 1:15
" .01 ,' 11. -, "_ , 11.
l)iudrtiall, !I(I, 9·1, 1:\1)
;\lo ,
I ; •. I :!:i. I ~ti .
(:"i .. ," i !'
Dk,.;ln ru< ufTaulI ~. !J.I , 1:111 Uiugt:ll t. " f Bah)-I"" (S,n id, -f:I D;"Rt IlN nf Si n. IlK' (( :"01k), ~ ; I>;"II)"';U' .. r Iblio·"n"••." " , 1'; - 12 Di"n)~i " . Tllr"ll , IN_ 1l,1, ;•.-.- !o/;. 1;2. !1i
[)HlCoKr .. ph ~,
En', Ill:! . t"'YTlfH~. :17 . :i!I. 411 t:", ,')(,·~i,. :!I. !.K- :.\I.
.·;,hills l'ill. I{ , (".! .. ,1:1 F:lIoI., tJII/mlll l . ·G , ·II( ·1\1, lil; . IllIi. IIIH, 112. I ll;. I ]~ j f",.ilh. !'I2. 1:0 Fila sl ri ,,~ . 1/11- 11 Frill, K. \"Om , Hi
C)pr i.:HI. /lJ 7, 1:111
I);ilgt"l". F. ,I., 14 11 0,,0;1.1 ;' ''. lUi
b ;'KI'illl, \1
:\ . \1. I ~ Hl- I j) I . 1:1Ii
L ~ , I I; 1l
'lIdfX
of Nalll~J ami SlIbjfCU
H~in5iU5,
D., 3511 H~~n. 28, 29 H~l1e.,i$tic age (Hellenism), 35-37, 38, 39. "I , "2, 4'1 , 5 1. 52, 33, 6 1. 69, n . 75, 12 1. 129 Hephaistu s. 27 Heracliw, (philosopher), 2', '16 , 93 Heraditus (critK). 71 Herd~ r, .J. (; .. 35n Hcr~ Tri~m~R i5'uS, 108 Herodotu ~. 27- 11 , 32, "0, 49 , 99, 12 1 Iic5iod. 2-1. 2511 Hilar)" J07 . 13 1 Hipyo. 93 Hippol ~'IU 5, 79 Hi510ricai ~ma"liC5, 20 l"IiSloriop;raph)" 3, 9 , 11, 20 , 132- 34 His!Ot\": ofklca$ or of cultu~. 19, 143 : philOso phy of, 7, 10, 20. Z2. 138, 1..0 ; 'hro~y of. W, 22, 138 _ as " Ih~ paM, M14-1.'). 66, 69. 7" , 85, W7 . 11 ~ 17 . 122 . 1 23 . 138 :a$"slUry,"
2 1, 66. n . 8 1. 85, 91. 122 . 138; as "Iclic~ (g ..... ' .clirc Ilomer, 29, 80, K5. 132 Homily. 13 1 tl or..ce, \11 Uume. 0 .. 137 lamblichus. 92- 91 lriomeneus, 23 Ion, 2K Isiunre of &-" iUe, 136n hocntn. J2 .Iacob. 5i J aC'ger, \\'., Hi, 3211, 56n Jeremiah. I 17 Jemme, 10'-12, l !j l .Ieru~lem temple. 52, 77 .Ieul'. 76. 77, H3. 9tJ. 100-10-1 /l'mi"" Ill. 11 7. 137 Jew~ , !l1- H . 7Mf. 8" , 911. 108, 122. 126,
12.
.Inhn
94. 99- 10-1 , 130 Jo ne~, A. H. M .• Il n .I()JCphu~. 32. KO. 97, 99. 1:H Chrr~(lstom,
177
Ju ba, 80
Judgn. BooA of, 11 0 Julian. 94 Ju liul Africanu$. 100, 116n JU5tin Martyr, 79, 8J-8." 87 JUI·erutl. 6 J Keuck . K.. 18
L.. :) lactanliu5. 10'- 11 , U O Laetius. C., 43 Liixlniu$, 130 Liberal arts. St>u library. Alexandrian, 36 L..~rl honnii!orro.
Liv)", 20 Logographoi , 25 Love, idea of. 134 Lo,·ejoy. A. 0 .. 6 lOwilh, K.• 7n. 9n. IO n Lucian , 72-701 Luciliu5. 43 Lunctius, 43
Marrailus: SmlHd Boo. of. 52; Four/la BooIt of. 53 :\fc Keon , R. P.. "4 n :'ofa"':lho, 97 Mart;U5 Aurelius, 65. 89 Marroll , H .· I., 55n, 56u 1lLi:9l)~a , h I :'o1;n:eutiu5. 94 Medicine. 36. iO. i 2 Mroflandc r. 45 ~I elhodiu$,
9{j- 104
Mille nuianism. 13i ~1inllciu$ Felht. 87 Mne moSyllc, 71 M omigli;ano, A .. 1211, 3211 , 350 , 67 .. . U .. n
MMo('hus. KO Moses. 54 , 57- 58. 00. 77. 83-85 pam·", . 11 1. 132 MOIion, id~a of, 7 ~lOlIer, F.. If! Mu~s, 2.. , !l 1 Mu ~ um . Ah:'xandrian , 36 Musit.. 56 j.l~ , 60, 73 /'Oae,'i..s, .. j N.. rrali~t' generd, 'IH Nature. idea 01". u ... 135 Nausiph;aIl
178
/ m/I'X ut
.\"(/1/1,..1
('\C' pus, .# 5-1(, New CumC'III', 4 3
lIIul SI/hi,'f!., 1'''l11p.:iu.~
I'''m l'c·~'.
NkcllC' t :n:r d , ~ ri
FeSl1h. (,11
Hr.
1'''ml'(''liu~ I·"rp h ~ rj" . ~"
Nile. 211 Nu~h . 54 , Ill'!. 1;1i
l 'l~id i ppu~ .
1'101
1" K!l unju ~ Alhi u lI_~,
4:1
I·t.. x;ph~nt'.\. 41 I· nl .~ il t'k~ . i ;l " n:· ,\da rni' c". I:ti l'n··So .. r.u i<. ph il< 'SO 'pht' H. 2:"., I :!·' " ..ohu s. (..~' 1I1"'Yt:..,o"OTU. , • . '! I . :I!I
(klil \·il,l~.
ti I . liil (kdipu§. 2;. :il'!, I;.' odol~ . 29 Ore~I t'.~ . 21'1 O rigell . /f12- J, IfH Ott" FrcisillK. 131;11
"r
"n 'KIt....., 1-1 1 I' r'''pc r'lill ~.
,, ;
"aitleb . " ; lro.6tw. 4 1 Pa naetius. -1 ;1 Pan ncnklcs. (;
1''''''1'''' ' " I ' \ ' III;lai,l(>. !:ttill I't tn lc mi ll~. I II!- II
l).dt~ln' r.
"\'I'rh .. , '; I
'=;;1.
1'
:.4
Pa trudu~. 2:1 l'a ul. ii. Ill,!. 111:\ Pa x I( u mana. I; I Penlall·udl. 1:\ . .'">7 . :iH. lm. !li Perg:lIllum . ~ ti l't'riJ)2 Phil' 1(; h"m~. 411" Phil< "kn lll ~. 2n . -I 2 Ph ik ~ 'ph ~ 1-1 . 1\1- 211. :t!. :ll i. ·1:1. :; r. ,. :1. -;or•. 71;. HU. H 3-~ 1 I'"",,.,m. 11• • 12·1. 127- 211 l'h il(" I {·plo;mu~ . H·,
,J
I. :I!i: 11
1' \I h;'I(" "·;III ~.
I'hil;lflt'l p hu ~ .
:I,i
2.·•. :.:1. il
I(t·;.... '11 (,,,, .... A.ryoc:). "vpn~l'd 10 ;;11. n . \12 . I ll. 1:1:; fn j!,."m', 17 . 2 1
hislf>r~ .
I(.l·lr' ~j"'li,ulln· .msfX"l li''' I),
pro,hkm in r .. bu r;)1 hi~l" n. I 21 i-211. ,:1.",. ' -I2-J.1 I(ht'luril', 1-1 , :I'i , :;11. '>l i. li2 . i ll. ~ I , \111 . 122. 1:«1--:11 . 1:12 " I(h..I'I(·s. :I/i I("fllan. " . lit l 1("ln ;lIni, ~.I;nfllall . 1:\10, l(u fi11lt,. '".1 Sal(;t " I Uuml :'I:j al . 2~ 1I
Sr.. lil(t"T. J, C .. :\5" Sdl\·'..j" ,·I' . .\ .. I; S,·ip;.. Afrin .. "'~ . .. 7
Pli n • . Ellk. , ,"X , \11t;
Sdl>i<mi, C irri" , ~ :t SI,"II.;ml it'S, hi\tnriL';I!. 211 s,'m"n l1lill' ,hdlin, ., ~-I (I Sl' nt·\";t, ~ i~ S" I'!U;,J,tiltl , 1:1. ;,:2 1. !~ I StT\'iu,. 'J/ S,' )(IUS l:llIl'iril"lls. -; / - 7-I . ~:? Sihkr . f .. (; .. 1-1-1-11 Si"·1111:•. I .ud " ". ~ l't
1'1 111; . YOU Il K(' t . fJ,-liJf
Slo.,· "ti' ~ l l C,i~is.
r lu( iulIs. I; PIUla fl'h. iJ - i -l. !12
Skl'\,'ir~. I:? I Skilfl't" ,. Q .. /-1 :1 SlIdl. IL III S,,, 1';11,',. :1Il-:I I . :'1:1. ;011 . :",:1, IN S"t"' lIn t .'lI 1,,\;:,,';, "I hhw ri:U1 >. ~ I. 1:J.j fTucbw., ....' ~"I,hi,ti, . MU: s,.·nmci S" J> h i ~l;t" ill
1';1\(1;11 . ~I l P;~isullllu . 21'1 Plag iarism . i!l . Ill. 11:1 Pla Ln. ' ;. 27. 311. H j. :\1;. ,,:\.
:,:"' . I ~I .
Ill.
93. \17. 117 . 12-\ Pb ulII~. 4:\. ·H-IS . -11; P1ra~Iff't". i2
I>cIT' • " • •" • •' "1. ;1 .. 1. :'" 'I •• ,., "~ . f't 1•• -' 'I _. " ' • :"",'
"
i:i. '!I. II" . IIIH. III!I. 124
l'ull'lIIon. Iq Pulilin. ,-I PuJ ~'''im . )';-12. -1:1
'ill. 1111 . 122.
S" pl.; >", ·11'1
1:\ 7
Index
of Nanzn 611d SubjtclS
Sozomcn . 9. 97- 101, 134 Spcnsier. 0 .. 411 SloicJ. 7. 55, 81. 124 Suclu niul, 61-66 Iniw.(n~. 18 SYl'"iallu5. 124
Tacilus, 85. 90 Tahhybiul.27 Talian . 80-84 . 87 Tclm. 8 TCTCntC. 4~
Tcrlullian, 16, 81-86, 87 Thale~, ~7
Thcmistius, 91 Theodo rc of Mopsucstia. 94 , 1.30 Thcodol'"Ctus of CYfUS, 94. 98- 104 ThcodolUs. 52 . 80 TheophiluJ. 97- /02 Thcophl'"ulul. J 7, 4 1. 106 Thcopompus. 49 Thucydkln, 20, 40, 46, 80. 99 Tibcrius. 66
179
TimaeuI, 50, 51, 60 Time. idea of , 6 , 7, 8 . 2 1, 124-25 Tnj an, 89 Truth, a5 critedo n o fhi510 ry, 41 , 48. 49, 59, 6.3, 66, 72, 10.3, 114 Valen., 90 Valenlinian, 90 Valc n,inu5, 86 ValeriUI M'lXimus. /4 1 Varro, 46. 9 1 VerBi!. 4!, 68, 142 Vincent of Bcauvail. "6n Vittu v,iuI. 61 Voltairc. j.. 138 Windelband . W., 5 WiKlom. idea or, 134
Xcnophanes, 25n, I! I Xen:n:, " uno of Cilium, !6
