Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-fwgfc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-10T12:23:54.086Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Athenagoras's Embassy: A Literary Fiction

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 June 2011

P. Lorraine Buck
P. Lorraine Buck
Affiliation:
University of Ottawa
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In his 1989 article entitled “Apologetic Literature and Ambassadorial Activities,” William R. Schoedel considers “aspects of the form of apologetic literature in the early church and Judaism.” More specifically, he attempts to discover possible models for the literary character of the Christian apologies, and in particular the Embassy of Athenagoras, in the various kinds of addresses that ambassadors delivered before the emperor when presenting appeals and requests. Examples of such addresses include the ambassadorial speech discussed by the third-century rhetorician Menander Rhetor, the legal oration as exemplified by Philostratus in his treatment of the trial of Apollonius of Tyana, and the imperial libellus or petition. Schoedel draws two clear conclusions from this investigation. The first is that the literary form of Athenagoras's Embassy is an “apologetically grounded petition,” that is, a “mixed form that as such appears to have no real precedent in the Greco-Roman literary tradition.” The second is that “there is good reason to think that [it] was written to be presented to the emperor or delivered before him.” The present article will explore the ideas and arguments that led Schoedel to each of his conclusions and will offer an alternative interpretation of the evidence in each case.

Type
Research Article
Information
Harvard Theological Review , Volume 89 , Issue 3 , July 1996 , pp. 209 - 226
Copyright
Copyright © President and Fellows of Harvard College 1996

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Schoedel, William R., “Apologetic Literature and Ambassadorial Activities,” HTR 82 (1989) 55CrossRefGoogle Scholar; all references to Athenagoras's Legatio will be to Schoedel's edition (Athenagoras: Legatio and De Resurrectione [Oxford: Clarendon, 1972]Google Scholar).

2 Schoedel, “Apologetic Literature,” 78.

3 Ibid.

4 Ibid., 55–57.

5 Ibid., 57–59.

6 Ibid., 59–60.

7 Ibid., 60.

8 Ibid., citing Millar, Fergus, The Emperor in the Roman World (London: Duckworth, 1977) 565Google Scholar.

9 Ibid., 61.

10 Ibid., 61–63.

11 Ibid., 63.

12 Ibid., 63–66.

13 Ibid., 70.

14 Ibid., 71.

15 Ibid.

16 Ibid., 72.

17 Ibid., 78.

18 Josephus Ant. 14.301–5; 17.299–317.

19 Ibid., 16.27–65.

20 Schoedel, “Apologetic Literature,” 65–66.

21 Ibid., 64.

22 Barnes, Timothy D., “Legislation Against the Christians,” JRomS 58 (1968) 37Google Scholar.

23 Ibid.

24 Athenagoras Legatio 1.2–2.6.

25 Tertullian Apol. 21.1.

26 Linder, Amnon, ed. and trans., The Jews in Roman Imperial Legislation (Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 1987) 67Google Scholar.

27 Ibid., 68.

28 Fox, Robin Lane, Pagans and Christians (New York: Knopf, 1987) 305–6Google Scholar.

29 Schoedel, “Apologetic Literature,” 69.

30 Philostratus Vita Apollonii 8.7.10.

31 Cameron, Alan, Barbarians and Politics at the Court of Arcadius (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1993) 127Google Scholar.

32 Ibid., 132.

33 Ibid.

34 In addition to Athenagoras's Legatio, there is the apology of Aristides and the two apologies of Justin Martyr. Quadratus, Apollinaris, and Melito of Sardis also wrote apologies to Roman emperors, but these survive only in fragments.

35 Millar, Emperor in the Roman World, 241.

36 Schoedel, “Apologetic Literature,” 73.

37 Ibid.

38 Ibid.

39 Ibid.

40 Ibid.

41 Ibid.

42 Schoedel, Athenagoras, xii.

43 Brunt, Peter A., “Marcus Aurelius and the Christians,” Studies in Latin Literature and Roman History (Collection Latomus 164; Bruxelles: Latomus, 1979) 507 and n. 74Google Scholar.

44 Barnes, Timothy D., “The Embassy of Athenagoras,” JTS 26 (1975) 111CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

45 Ibid., 114.

46 Schoedel, Athenagoras, x–xii.

47 Codex Paris 451 (ibid., xxxv–xxxvi).

48 Barnes, “The Embassy.” 113.

49 Grant, Robert M., From Augustus to Constantine (New York: Harper & Row, 1970) 112Google Scholar.

50 Grant, Robert M., Greek Apologists of the Second Century (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1988) 100Google Scholar.

51 Barnard, Leslie W., Athenagoras: A Study in Second Century Christian Apologetic (Paris: Beauchesne, 1972) 23Google Scholar. The passages are: Athenagoras Legatio 11.1, 11.3.

52 Ibid., 22.

53 Richardson, Cyril C., ed. and trans., Early Christian Fathers (New York: Macmillan, 1970) 292–93Google Scholar.

54 Ibid., 310; ἐπιτρέΨατε ἐνταῦθα τοῦ λόγου ἐξακούστου μετὰ πολλῆς κραυγῆς γεγονότος ἐπὶ παρρησίαν ἀναγαγεῖν, ὡς ἐπὶ βασιλέων φιλσόφων ἀπολογούμενον.

55 Barnard, Christian Apologetic, 23.

56 Ibid.

57 Millar, Emperor in the Roman World, 564.

58 Brunt, “Marcus Aurelius,” 516.

59 Lane Fox, Pagans and Christians, 305–6. To the list of those who deny that Athenagoras's apology was delivered before the emperors may be added those scholars who have described it with greater or lesser conviction as an “open letter.” These include Frend, W. H. C., The Rise of Christianity (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1984) 234Google Scholar; and Pouderon, Bernard, Athénagore d'Athènes, Philosophe Chrétien (Paris: Beauchesne, 1989) 62Google Scholar.

60 Schoedel, Athenagoras, xi-xii.

61 In addition to Barnes and Grant, see Barnard, Christian Apologetic, 19; and Schoedel, William R., “Christian ‘Atheism’ and the Peace of the Roman Empire,” CH 42 (1973) 309Google Scholar.

62 Barnes, “The Embassy,” 112.

63 Ibid., 112–13.

64 Millar, Emperor in the Roman World, 379–80.

65 Ibid., 543.

66 Schoedel, Athenagoras, xiv.

67 Ibid., xii.

68 Athenagoras's apology deals with three charges against the Christians, but does not treat all the charges equally; on atheism, see 4.1–30.6; on Thyestean banquets and Oedipoean incest, see 31.1–36.3.

69 For example, Athenagoras's philosophical discussion of the belief that God is One in chap. 8.1–7.

70 Grant, Robert M., “The Chronology of the Greek Apologists,” VC 9 (1955) 31Google Scholar.

71 Farquharson, A. S. L., Marcus Aurelius: His Life and His World (Westport, CT: Greenwood, 1975) 146–47Google Scholar.

72 Schoedel (Athenagoras, xii) alludes to this point in the introduction to his edition of Athenagoras's Legatio. Although at the time he was of the opinion that Athenagoras's apology was not intended to be delivered before the emperors, he does not pursue it.

73 Millar, Emperor in the Roman World, 564.

74 Ibid.

75 Athenagoras Legatio 1.3.

76 Ibid., 2.1.

77 Schoedel, “Apologetic Literature,” 74.

78 Mason, Hugh J., Greek Terms for Roman Institutions: A Lexicon and Analysis (Toronto: Hakkert, 1974) 126–31Google Scholar.

79 A11 references to Josephus will be from: Josephus, Works (trans. Marcus, Ralph; LCL; vol. 7 and vol. 8; London: Heinemann, 1957 and 1963)Google Scholar.

80 Millar, Emperor in the Roman World, 217–18.

81 SIG 2. 837.

82 This is my own English paraphrase and summary.

83 Millar, Emperor in the Roman World, 571.

84 Ibid.

85 Ibid., 572.

86 This point was suggested by Paolo Ubaldi and quoted by Pellegrino, Michele in his Sludi su L'Antica Apologetica (Roma: Edizioni di Storia e Letterature, 1947) 2Google Scholar.