Average Reviews:
(More customer reviews)A book on the fourth century that cites Saul Alinsky and Richard Nixon is not a typical history! The reason is that "Constantine and the Bishops" is as much about political science as history. Using the usual traditional sources, Drake goes further and examines agendas; the people he reveals are refreshingly understandable. In fact, I kept finding myself thinking: "Of course!", and "That reminds me of [name]", and "That's the same kind of mistake I might have made", etc. Constantine comes across as a very believable person trying desperately to bring peace and order to an empire plagued by special interests and external challenges (so what else is new! ). For example, regards special interests, Drake points out that Constantine briefly transferred some legal functions to the bishops. The reason was corruption in the legal profession mirroring today's problems in the legal system (i.e. money buying favorable decisions). How contemporary! ----- In terms of history, this work excels because it offers reasonable perspectives within which events take place. Instead of a mountain of facts, Drake selects currents within which they make sense. The "Big Events" of this period were: The Great Persecution (303-313) by Emperor Diocletian , the reign of Constantine (324-337), the brief counter-revolution of Emperor Julian "the Apostate" (361-263), and the final conquest of power by the Christian bishops under Emperor Theodosius I (379-395). The history in this book is however very detailed. It reaches back to the decline of the Roman Senate under Augustus Caesar three centuries before, and looks ahead to the ratification of the Theodosian Code in 438. Even without much knowledge of the fourth century, a reader will finish with an excellent grounding in the period. Over 51 pages of footnotes, a list of 118 primary sources and 43 PAGES of secondary sources (!), are backed up by an excellent index. The enquiring reader will have no shortage of further reading to pursue! ----- One interesting thought that Drake comes back to repeatedly is that "the ancient state was built on the premise that organized human activity was needed to ensure that [divinity] remained benevolent to the community." He points out another fact that was brushed under the carpet in later times: many pagans were monotheists before the final victory of Christianity, and that Constantine may well have been a monotheist well before he accepted Christianity. Drake shows that the failure of the Great Persecution was due in part to the fact that pagan and Christian neighbors usually got along rather well, contrary to myth. Constantine had no desire to fail (as had Diocletian) by encouraging conflict; Constantine's challenge was to keep the Christian church from tearing itself apart. Within the church, a centralized bureaucracy had not yet emerged, and the bishops reined supreme. Some (not all!) were obsessed with a search for "heretics". Once Christianity "became popular" a flood of new converts, many with little religious motivation, threatened to swamp the church. For those who had suffered under Diocletion the stampede of opportunists was - at best - a mixed blessing! Constantine constantly came down against the exclusionists, favoring an inclusive approach. In fact the evolution of Christianity into an intolerant movement, Drake points out, was not inevitable: internal conflicts had more to do its intolerance (later projected outward) than anything else. Julian's brief counter-revolution just fed internal paranoia and strengthened the hand of the extremists within Christianity. (How familiar! Radicalization of a movement due to unsuccessful external persecution combined with internal "purges" of deviants!) This is an excellent volume. If I were to recommend a "first read" for those wanting to understand fourth century Christianity, this would be The Book!
Click Here to see more reviews about: Constantine and the Bishops: The Politics of Intolerance (Ancient Society and History)
Historians who viewed imperial Rome in terms of a conflict between pagans and Christians have often regarded the emperor Constantine's conversion as the triumph of Christianity over paganism. But inConstantine and the Bishops, historian H. A. Drake offers a fresh and more nuanced understanding of Constantine's rule and, especially, of his relations with Christians.Constantine, Drake suggests, was looking not only for a god in whom to believe but also a policy he could adopt. Uncovering the political motivations behind Constantine's policies, Drake shows how those policies were constructed to ensure the stability of the empire and fulfill Constantine's imperial duty in securing the favor of heaven.Despite the emperor's conversion to Christianity, Drake concludes, Rome remained a world filled with gods and with men seeking to depose rivals from power. A book for students and scholars of ancient history and religion,Constantine and the Bishops shows how Christian belief motivated and gave shape to imperial rule.
Get 20% OFF
0 comments:
Post a Comment