Ambiguous Christians and Their Useful Texts: Tatian, Bardaisan, Symmachus, and Rhodon in Eusebius’ <i>Ecclesiastical History</i>Zeitschrift für Antikes Christentum / Journal of Ancient ChristianitySyriaca.org: The Syriac Reference PortalThe National Endowment for the HumanitiesThe International Balzan Prize FoundationDavid A. Michelsoncbsc_adminRecord added to Zotero bycbsc_adminSyriaca.org: The Syriac Reference Portalhttp://syriaca.org/cbss/EL7EEPQR/tei
Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
2025-05-20-05:00
Born digital.
CREATED: This bibl record was autogenerated from a Zotero record.David J.DeVoreAmbiguous Christians and Their Useful Texts: Tatian, Bardaisan, Symmachus, and Rhodon in Eusebius’ <i>Ecclesiastical History</i>http://syriaca.org/cbss/EL7EEPQRhttps://www.zotero.org/groups/a_comprehensive_bibliography_on_syriac_studies/items/EL7EEPQRhttps://www.zotero.org/groups/4861694/items/EL7EEPQRZeitschrift für Antikes Christentum / Journal of Ancient Christianity27:32023413-448Eusebius did not represent all heretics in the <i>Ecclesiastical History</i> as equally pernicious. This paper presents close readings of Eusebius’ chapters about three relatively benign heretics, namely Tatian (<i>Historia ecclesiastica</i> 4,29), Bardaisan (4,30), and Symmachus (6,17), and I also explore Rhodon (<i>Historia ecclesiastica</i> 5,13), a student of Tatian whom Eusebius never labels a heretic. Three inferences emerge from these readings. First, rather than condemning all heretics as equally demonic, deceitful, morally depraved, and worthless, Eusebius considered some heresies less dangerous than others. Second, Eusebius commended some heretics’ useful writings, which in each case Eusebius quotes in his own œuvre; he thus retained some of Clement’s and Origen’s openness to heretics’ ideas. Third, the case of Rhodon shows that Eusebius assumed no obligation to classify all Christian thinkers as orthodox or heretical: as with Rhodon, Eusebius elides the ecclesiastical status of Tertullian and Ammonius (<i>Historia ecclesiastica</i> 2,2,4; 6,19,9–10), two other Christians of questionable orthodoxy. For Eusebius, in sum, the usefulness of an author’s texts sometimes superseded the harm of that author’s questionable orthodoxy, especially when that author hailed from a less-harmful heresy or was not clearly a heretic.
DeVore, David J. “Ambiguous Christians and Their Useful Texts: Tatian, Bardaisan, Symmachus, and Rhodon in Eusebius’ Ecclesiastical History.” Zeitschrift Für Antikes Christentum / Journal of Ancient Christianity 27:3 (2023): 413–48. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1515/zac-2023-0025.
David J. DeVore, Ambiguous Christians and Their Useful Texts: Tatian, Bardaisan, Symmachus, and Rhodon in Eusebius’ Ecclesiastical History,” Zeitschrift Für Antikes Christentum / Journal of Ancient Christianity 27:3 (2023): 413–48, https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1515/zac-2023-0025.