Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

Making Christian History: Eusebius of Caesarea and His Readers by Michael J. Hollerich

2021; The Catholic University of America Press; Volume: 107; Issue: 3 Linguagem: Inglês

10.1353/cat.2021.0025

1534-0708

Sr. Maria Theotokos Adams Ssvm,

Archaeology and Historical Studies

Reviewed by: Making Christian History: Eusebius of Caesarea and His Readers by Michael J. Hollerich Sr. Maria Theotokos Adams Ssvm Making Christian History: Eusebius of Caesarea and His Readers. By Michael J. Hollerich. [Christianity in Late Antiquity, 11]. (Oakland, CA: University of California Press. 2021. Pp. xi, 316. $95.00. ISBN 978-0-520-2953-60. eBook ISBN 9780520968134.) Despite Jacob Burkhardt's often repeated accusation of being "the first thoroughly dishonest and unfair historian of ancient times," Eusebius of Caesarea (c. 260-339AD) and his Historia ecclesiastica cannot be easily set aside. Eusebius's contemporary readers highly esteemed his Historia, the ten-book annotated anthology preserving what he deemed to be the most important textual evidence of the first three-hundred years of Christian history. Less than a century after the author's death, manuscript evidence shows widespread diffusion of his Greek original, prompt translations into Latin, Syriac, and Armenian (and possibly Coptic), and new authors who filled in and continued the Historia up to their own times. Printed editions in Greek, Latin, and modern vernacular languages have circulated since the sixteenth century. Modern studies of early Christianity nearly all depend heavily on fragments of cited works only preserved within the Historia. For seventeen hundred years, Eusebius's Historia ecclesiastica has remained the point of departure for all stripes of ecclesiastical historiographers—whether enthusiastic continuers, or cautious critics. Nevertheless, no single study has attempted to examine its transmission and reception until now. Michael Hollerich has produced a valuable study on Eusebius and the Historia ecclesiastica by asking "how subsequent tradition used him over the very long period since he wrote his history" (p. 2). Hollerich begins by following the book as it moves through the Late Antique Christian oecumene under ever-changing conditions. He explains that "although we will treat these traditions separately [Greek, Latin, Syriac, Armenian, Coptic], they were by no means separate in reality. We will see repeated instances of cross-fertilization—whether by borrowing, imitation, or competition—across linguistic, ecclesiastical, and political boundaries" (p. 47). After an introduction to Eusebius and the Historia ecclesiastica, Hollerich dedicates Chapter 2 to the Greek imperial continuers Socrates, Sozomen, and [End Page 430] Theodoret, and the Latin translation by Rufinus (pp. 47–87). Chapter 3 traces the early reception in "the Non-Greek East" (pp. 88–140), ranging from East Syrian Christians (Church of the East) and the West Syrian Orthodox, to Armenian historiographers and the complex influence on the Coptic tradition. Chapters 4 and 5 cover the medieval West and East respectively (pp. 141–70; pp. 171–190), extending from Cassiodorus to Jacobus de Voragine, and tracing briefly the Byzantine variations of the "chronicle" genre which proliferated according to Eusebius's models. Finally, Chapters 6 and 7 (pp. 191–237; pp. 238–73) present the Historia ecclesiastica in the age of humanism, the subsequent crisis and "confessionalization" of Church history, and on through the stages of French and German critical method from the seventeenth century up to the boiling point of the late nineteenth and twentieth centuries. Chapter 3 on the "Non-Greek East" especially stands out as it traces the common intellectual bonds forged by the Historia between imperial Christian historiographers and those on the ecclesial and geographic periphery. Hollerich draws on experts in highly specialized fields in order to present readers with lesser-known authors like Jacob of Edessa, Dionysius of Tel-Maḥre, Michael the Syrian, as well as the early Armenian scholars Mesrop Maštoc' and Koriwn, and their medieval heirs Movsēs Xorenac'i and Step'anos Tarōnec'i. The transmission of the Historia into Armenian depended on a Syriac translation of a Greek version partially influenced by Rufinus's early Latin translation. Eusebius's Historia and other works flowed through the monastic and cathedral school networks of the fifth and sixth centuries across the Eastern Mediterranean and deep into Mesopotamia. Hollerich's work may upturn some assumptions, while clearly inviting further studies. Does the history of Eusebius's readers challenge Walter Bauer's thesis of ecclesial isolation and complete autonomy between Christian groups in Late Antiquity? Which elements of the Historia caused such diverse readers to identify so closely with his book...