Citation Methodologies in Eusebius’ Historia ecclesiastica and Other Ancient Historiography

This dissertation examines ancient historiographic citation methodologies in light of Mikhail Bakhtin’s dichotomy between polyphony and monologization. In particular, this dissertation argues that Eusebius of Caesarea’s Historia ecclesiastica (HE) abandons the monologic citation methodology typical of previous Greek and Hellenistic historiography and introduces a polyphonic citation methodology that influences subsequent late-ancient Christian historiography to varying degrees. Whereas Pre-Eusebian Greek and Hellenistic historiographers typically use citations to support the single authorial consciousness of the historiographer, Eusebius uses citations to counterbalance his own shortcomings as a witness to past events. Eusebius allows his citations to retain their own voice, even when they conflict with his. The result is a narrative that transcends the point of view of any single individual and makes multiple witnesses, including the narrator, available to the reader. Post-Eusebian late-ancient Christian historiographers exhibit the influence of Eusebius’ innovation, but they are not as intentional as Eusebius in their use of citation methodologies. Many subsequent Christian historiographers use both monologic and polyphonic citation methodologies. Their tendency to follow Eusebius’ practice of citing numerous lengthy citations sometimes emphasizes points of view that oppose the author’s point of view. When an opposing viewpoint surfaces in enough citations, a polyphonic citation methodology emerges. The reader holds the two different narrative strands in tension as the author continues to give voice to opposing viewpoints. After illustrating the citation methodologies with passages from numerous Greek, Hellenistic, and late ancient Christian historiographers, this dissertation concludes with a short computational analysis that uses natural language processing to reveal some broad trends that highlight the previous findings and suggest a possibility for future research.

Finding Onesimus: Recovering the Story of a First-Century Fugitive Slave

Author: Ryan Lokkesmoe Title: Finding Onesimus: Recovering the Story of a First-Century Fugitive Slave Advisor: Pamela Eisenbaum Degree Date: August 2015 ABSTRACT This dissertation is an investigation into the experience of a first-century fugitive slave named Onesimus, who is known to us primarily through Paul’s letter to Philemon (Phlm) in the New Testament. Within this broader purpose, this project challenges a popular historical theory for Onesimus’ flight, the so-called Amicus Domini theory. This is the theory that Onesimus fled his master Philemon with the premeditated intention of seeking out the Apostle Paul as a peacemaker in a conflict Onesimus was having with Philemon. The Amicus Domini theory is accepted by many scholars, though rarely discussed in detail or examined critically. The goal of this project is to offer a more probable historical reconstruction of Onesimus’ flight – one that takes better stock of the available evidence (historical, textual, archaeological, legal, and rhetorical). This project is rooted in the sub-discipline of the Historical Critical method, though rhetorical analysis is applied as well. This study offers a translation and commentary of Phlm, as well as an examination of Paul’s rhetoric in the letter. Other sources that specifically mention Onesimus are also investigated, e.g. Colossians, ancient Christian commentators, and the subscriptions in the manuscripts. The project also examines slavery in the Ancient Mediterranean world with a view toward understanding what most slaves experienced, and especially fugitive slaves. Roman law of slavery is also discussed, as well as the estimated travel times and cost of Onesimus’ journey (whether from Colossae to Rome, Caesarea Maritima, or Ephesus). There are many factors that are problematic for the Amicus Domini theory, e.g. the duration of Onesimus’ journey, the financial cost to Philemon, and the fact that the documents typically used to support the Amicus Domini theory (Pliny’s letters to Sabinianus and the writings of Roman jurists) do not comport with the data in Phlm. This dissertation offers a modified theory for Onesimus’ predicament: Amicus Domini Ex Post Facto. Onesimus did not leave Philemon intending to seek out Paul and reconcile with Philemon, but he eventually decided to seek help long after the fact. This historical reconstruction makes better sense of the evidence, and provides a clearer view of what Onesimus faced during his flight.