Revelations: Visions, Prophecy, and Politics in the Book of Revelation (26 page)

77
As is well-known, the writers of this Declaration apparently had in mind only men like themselves—property-owning, Caucasian males—although since their time, of course, most Americans have come to apply it to all people, or at least to all citizens.

1
Eusebius,
HE
8.5.1; Lactantius,
De Mortibus Persecutorum,
12, 2–4. Note that there were, as Professor Elizabeth Clark kindly reminded me in a letter, a series of decrees regarding treatment of Christians. These events are also discussed in Timothy D. Barnes,
Constantine and Eusebius
(Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1981), 22.

2
On the number, see William Telfer, “St. Peter of Alexander and Arius,”
Analecta Bollandiana
67 (1949): 126; Eusebius,
HE,
8.6–10.10;
Timothy D. Barnes,
Constantine and Eusebius
, 201. On Melitius’ refusal, see William Telfer, “Melitius of Lycopolis and Episcopal Succession in Egypt,”
Harvard Theological Review
48.4 (1955): 227–237.

3
Lactantius,
De Mortibus Persecutorum,
33–34.

4
Eusebius,
HE,
9.6.2.

5
Eusebius,
Life of Constantine,
Book 1, 28–29, in Eusebius,
Life of Constantine: Introduction, Translation, and Commentary,
eds. and trans. Averil Cameron and Stuart George Hall (New York: Oxford University Press, 1999), 80–81.

6
See Lactantius,
De Mortibus Persecutorum
, 48.2–12, for the entire text of the socalled Edict of Milan, in which Constantine and Licinius declare that “our purpose is to grant both to the Christians and to all others full authority to follow whatever worship each one has desired, so that whatever divinity dwells in heaven may be benevolent and propitious to us, and to all placed under our authority.”

7
See, for example, Fergus Millar, “Edicts and
Epistolae
: Toleration, Restitution, and
Benificia
,” in
The Emperor in the Roman World
(Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1977), 577–584.

8
Ian Boxall has noted Athanasius’ interpretative move, and some of its later effects, in his article “The Many Faces of Babylon the Great:
Wirkungsgeschichte
and the Interpretation of Revelation 17,” in
Studies in the Book of Revelation,
ed. Steve Moyise (London: T&T Clark, 2000), 51–68.

9
See John Teall, “The Grain Supply of the Byzantine Empire,”
Dumbarton Oaks Papers
13 (1955): 90–96: Michael J. Hollerich, “The Alexandrian Bishops and the Grain Trade: Ecclesiastical
Commerce in Late Roman Egypt,”
Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient
25.2 (1982): 187–207.

10
Barnes,
Constantine and Eusebius,
224.

11
For some discussion, see pages 138–139. On Arius, see Rowan Williams,
Arius,
2nd ed. (London: SCM Press, 1987), 41–61; Robert Gregg and Dennis Groh,
Early Arianism: A View of Salvation
(Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1981); Lewis Ayers,
Nicea and Its Legacy: An Approach to Fourth Century Trinitarian Theology
(New York: Oxford University Press, 2005).

12
Eusebius,
Life of Constantine,
Book 2, 63, in Cameron and Hall, 115–116; see also Barnes,
Constantine and Eusebius
, 200–202.

13
Constantine,
Letter to Alexander and Arius,
cited in Eusebius’
Life of Constantine
, Book 2, 64–72; for a clear translation with introduction and commentary, see Eusebius,
Life of Constantine
, translated and with introduction and commentary by Cameron and Hall (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1999), 116–119.

14
The literature about the Arian controversy is famously voluminous; the books mentioned in note 11, and the bibliographies contained in both, offer a good place to start.

15
The number is disputed, and uncertain; Eustathius of Antioch estimates that there were more than 275; see
Life of Constantine
, Book 3, 6.1; 9, in Cameron and Stuart, 123–124; and Theodoret,
Historia Ecclesiae,
I.7, 32.3; Athanasius,
Apol. Contra Arianos
, I, claims that there were “more than three hundred”; see also
De Decretis
3 and
Historia Arianorum
67. In
Ep ad Afros
2, however, he suggests the symbolically charged number 318. Scholars comparing the accounts have challenged this number; Ernest Honigmann, for example, offers a much reduced estimate in “La liste originale des Pères de Nicée,”
Byz
14 (1939): 17–76; see Williams’ discussion in
Arius,
67; Barnes suggests “nearly three hundred” in the account he offers in
Constantine and Eusebius
, 214.

16
See, for example, his
Letter to the Bishops of Egypt,
13, and his treatise
On the Synods.

17
While discussion of the theological implications of the Greek term
homoousios
is beyond the scope of our historical focus here, one can find some useful discussion in Gregg and Groh,
Early Arianism;
Williams,
Arius,
95–214; Khaled Anatolios,
Athanasius: The Coherence of His Thought
(New York: Routledge, 1998); Lewis Ayres,
Nicea and Its Legacy: An Approach to Fourth Century Trinitarian Theology
(New York: Oxford University Press, 2004); and Thomas G. Weinandy,
Athanasius: A Theological Introduction
(Hampshire, UK: Ashgate Publishing, 2007).

18
Note that Christians like Melitius, who “confessed” before a magistrate and so had risked their lives but had not been killed, were recognized by their fellow Christians not as
martyrs,
but
confessors
.

19
For discussion, see Philostorgius,
Historia Ecclesiae
2.11, 3.11; Sozomen,
Historia Ecclesiae
2.17.4; Socrates,
Historia Ecclesiae
1.23; Athanasius,
Apologia Contra Arianos,
6.4; Leslie Barnard,
Studies in Athanasius’ Apologia Secunda,
European University Studies XXIII, vol. 467 (Bern, Switzerland: Peter Lang, 1992), 38–41; Barnes,
Constantine and Eusebius,
230.

20
Barnard points out, however, “many examples of fluidity in episcopal appointments” among Athanasius’ near contemporaries, including those of Ambrose and Augustine; see
Studies in Athanasius’ Apologia Secunda,
in European University Studies XXIII, vol. 467 (Bern, Switzerland: Peter Lang, 1992), 40–41.

21
Places to start investigating how he did this include Susannah Elm’s incisive study of Athanasius’ effort to supervise women ascetics in
Virgins of God: The Making of Asceticism in Late Antiquity
(New York: Oxford University Press, 1994); and especially the learned and influential contribution by David
Brakke,
Athanasius and Asceticism
(Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1995), originally published as
Athanasius and the Politics of Asceticism
(New York: Oxford University Press, 1995). The important book by Annick Martin offers a careful investigation and discussion of the evidence:
Athanase d
’
Alexandrie et l
’
Église d
’
Égypte au IVe siècle (328–373),
(Rome: École Francaise de Rome, 1996), especially part three,
“Le Champ des Forces dans l’Église D’Égypte a l’Avenement de d’Athanase.”

22
Wilhelm Bousset,
The Antichrist Legend;
see also Hippolytus’ comments on Antichrist in
De Christo et Antichristo
and others who characterized heretics as deceived by Satan, and Armstrong-Reiner’s discussion of patristic references to Antichrist,
“You Opened the Book,”
55–218.

23
“Athanasius
contra mundum
,” as he was frequently called; cited in Weinandy’s appreciative introduction to his theology, in
Athanasius,
vii; for the other characterization, see Athanasius’
Apologia Contra Arianos,
9.

24
Timothy D. Barnes,
Athanasius and Constantius: Theology and Politics in the Constantinian Empire
(Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1993), 32–33; for a view intended to be more balanced and corrective, see, for example, Duane W. H. Arnold,
The Early Episcopal Career of Athanasius of Alexandria
(Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 1991), 9–95. See also Richard P. C. Hanson,
The Search for the Christian Doctrine of God: The Arian Controversy, 318–381
(London: T&T Clark, 1988), 39ff. For a broader perspective on social conflict in Alexandria, see Christopher Haas
, Alexandria in Late Antiquity: Topography and Social Conflict
(Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1997), especially 173–277.

25
Athanasius,
Apologia Contra Arianos
, 90.

26
Athanasius,
Letter to the Bishops of Egypt,
5; in 9, he calls them “antichrists.”

27
Athanasius,
Letter to the Bishops of Egypt,
22.

28
Athanasius,
Letter to the Bishops of Egypt,
23.

29
Athanasius,
Historia Arianorum
, 78.1.

30
Athanasius,
Historia Arianorum,
73, 78.

31
Athanasius,
Historia Arianorum,
52; on Athanasius’ view of his own struggle, see Weinandy,
Athanasius,
1–10; for a different view, see Barnes,
Athanasius and Constantine,
53, 121–135.

32
Athanasius,
Historia Arianorum:
comparing Constantius with Antichrist, 67; as forerunner of Antichrist, 70; his appointed bishop as Antichrist, 75–76; Constantius acts like Antichrist, 77–80.

33
Khaled Anatolios, “The Influence of Irenaeus on Athanasius,” in
Studia Patristica
XXXVI (Leuven, Belgium: Peeters, 2001), XIII, 463–476, notes other parallels that demonstrate such influence, although he does not mention this one.

34
Although manuscript evidence indicates that Irenaeus’ massive book
Against Heresies
was known in Egypt about ten years after he wrote it, we know little about who would have read, much less heeded, his admonitions. Although apparently his work influenced Athanasius (see Anatolios’ article cited in note 17), who else read it would depend not only on the uncertainties of book circulation at the time but also on communication between various groups of Christians, as Elizabeth Clark has shown so brilliantly of a later stage of the Origenist controversy; see her book
The Origenist Controversy: The Cultural Construction of an Early Christian Debate
(Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1992).

35
For an excellent discussion of the state of this question, see James Goerhing, “The Provenance of the Nag Hammadi Codices Once More,” in
Studia Patristica
35 (2001): 234–253.

36
For discussion, see the outstanding monograph by Brakke,
Athanasius and Asceticism
.

37
For a good recent overview, see William Harmless,
Desert Christians: An Introduction to the Literature of Early Monasticism
(New York: Oxford University Press, 2004). For this period, basic sources include Athanasius’
Life of Anthony,
discussed below; also the
Apophthegmata Patrum
(“Sayings of the Fathers”), the
History of the Monks in Egypt,
and Palladius’
Lausiac History,
as well as the
Lives of Pachomius.
Significant recent works in English include Brakke,
Athanasius and Asceticism;
Peter Brown,
The Body and Society;
Clark,
The Origenist Controversy;
Elm,
Virgins of God;
James Goehring,
Ascetics, Society, and the Desert
(Harrisburg, PA: Trinity Press, 1999); and Philip Rousseau,
Ascetics, Authority, and the Church
(New York: Oxford University Press, 1978).

38
Verba Seniorum XII, 8, cited in Helen Waddell,
The Desert Fathers
(New York: Vintage, 1998), 117.

39
This brief sketch relies primarily on the clear and incisive account given by Philip Rousseau in
Pachomius: The Making of a Community in Fourth Century Egypt
(Berkeley: University of California Press, 1985).

40
For discussion, see Goehring, “The Provenance of the Nag Hammadi Codices Once More,” cited in note 35 above.

41
Athanasius,
Festal Letter
39, warns that some Christians, apparently including monks, whom he calls heretics, “were boasting about the books that they call ‘apocryphal,” and, to his dismay, “mix these with the divinely inspired Scriptures,” use them in teaching, and refer to them in discussion. See the comments preceding notes to chapter
3
for reference to the fuller and more technical version of matters discussed in the rest of this chapter.

42
The Prayer of the Apostle Paul,
NHC I, 1
, in
CGL
vol. 1, 9.

43
I Corinthians 2:10.

44
The Secret Revelation (Apocryphon) of James, in
NHC I, 2,
in 
CGL
vol. 1, 28–29, I, lines 10–19. Recently, scholars of classical texts have been discussing how readers might have
“experienced” reading or hearing such a codex; see Stephen Emmel, “Religious Tradition, Textual Transmission, and the Nag Hammadi Codices,” in
The Nag Hammadi Library After Fifty Years,
ed. John D. Turner and Anne McGuire (Leiden, Netherlands: Brill, 1977), 34–43, and William A. Johnson, “Toward a Sociology of Reading in Classical Antiquity,”
American Journal of Philology
121 (2000): 593–627; for other references, see Jenott and Pagels, “Anthony’s Letters and Nag Hammadi Codex I,”
Journal of Early Christian Studies
18.4, 562ff.