The Historians of Late Antiquity (24 page)

Text and translation

Greek text edited by L. Parmentier (1954),
Griechischen Christlichen Schriftsteller
. English translation (1843) in
Greek ecclesiastical historians of the First Six Centuries. Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers
, translation available on-line at:
http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/NPNF2-03/Npnf2-03-04.htm#P112_4318
.

12
OROSIUS

Life

Our information about the life of Orosius is almost entirely limited to the period between 414 and 418. Since Augustine describes Orosius during these years as a “young priest” (
ep
. 169) and as a “son by age” (
ep
. 166), Orosius was then presumably around 30 years old, and was therefore born around 375. After his departure from Africa for Spain at the beginning of 418, Orosius disappeared from history.

Contemporaries of Orosius referred to him by the single name, and it is not until the mid-sixth-century history of Jordanes that the historian is referred to as “Paulus Orosius.” This name may, however, be a mistaken expansion of a “P” for “presybter” (priest) (Arnaud-Lindet 1990: xiii). Augustine says that Orosius had come to him “from the shore of the Ocean.” Avitus, a priest of Bracara (modern-day Braga) on the Portuguese coast, wrote a letter in which he called Orosius his fellow priest. Avitus also entrusted Orosius with certain relics of St Stephen to bring to Palchonius, the bishop of Bracara. It can therefore be assumed that Orosius was ordained as a priest in that town. His work suggests that in addition to theological training, he also had at least the rudiments of a classical education.

The only information we have from Orosius about his life prior to 414 is a cryptic passage lamenting misfortunes he suffered at an unspecified time in the past. “ … how I first saw the unfamiliar barbarians previously unknown to me, how I evaded enemies, how I flattered the powerful, how I guarded against heathens, how I fled from those who would ambush me, and, finally, how hidden in a sudden mist I evaded those pursuing me on sea and seeking me with rocks and javelins, even almost seizing me once” (3.20.6–7). Past interpretations of these lines have often suggested that Orosius
is recounting his forced flight from Spain during barbarian invasions. Elsewhere, however, Orosius downplays the problem of barbarian–Roman rapprochement. Arnaud-Lindet suggests that the passage would apply more easily to an escape from captivity than to flight from an invasion. Noting that in his geography Orosius mentions twice, with praise, the relatively insignificant coastal town of Brigantia (1.2.71, 1.2.81), he speculates that Orosius had been captured by Scottish pirates during the invasion of 405 and found refuge in Brigantia after his escape (Arnaud-Lindet 1990: xi–xii). Elsewhere Orosius alludes to disturbances which forced his departure to Africa, which might have been theological controversies rather than military invasions (5.2).

Orosius arrived in Hippo in 414 and presented Augustine with the first of the three works he is known to have written. The
Commonitorium de Errore Priscillianistarum et Origenistarum
is a short “memorandum” to the bishop on heretical ideas which were prominent at the time. In it he claims that neither his will nor accident had brought him to Africa, but the will of God. It seems clear from the introduction that the two had already discussed some of the heretical ideas which Orosius addresses in his pamphlet. Priscillian was a Spaniard born around 340 who preached ascetic renunciation (Burrus 1995; Chadwick 1976). After being condemned, restored, and condemned again after 380, Priscillian and several of his followers were executed in 385 or 386. While Priscillian was revered as a martyr for a time after his death, councils in 400 and afterward condemned his doctrines, which were considered excessively dualistic and “Manichaean.” Orosius’ criticisms of Priscillian in his
Commonitorium
are sharp but may rely on material falsely attributed to him (Chadwick 1976: 202). Orosius also criticizes Origenist ideas which he claims had been brought to Spain from Jerusalem, and begs Augustine for his thoughts on these errors. Augustine, responding with “as much brevity and clarity as possible” (Aug.
Retractiones
2.44), criticizes the Origenist principles as described by Orosius, but refrains from dismissing Origen altogether.

It is during this year that Orosius was first enjoined by Augustine to compile a list of the misfortunes which the Romans had endured in the past. Augustine desired such a collection to supplement his work in the
City of God
, which sought to refute pagan charges that the Gothic sack of Rome in 410 had resulted from the abandonment of the traditional gods. This collection was to serve as the seed from which Orosius’ full history would grow.

Orosius remained with Augustine for about a year. In the spring of 415, he set off to Palestine and to Jerome bearing letters from Augustine. In a letter to Jerome introducing Orosius, Augustine says that he has taught the young priest all that he could and was now handing him over to Jerome for further instruction. Augustine sent along with Orosius information about the dangers of the thought of Pelagius. The theologian Pelagius had rejected interpretations of original sin which deprecated the power and responsibility of Christians to use their free will to act justly, and he demanded that all Christians, not just priests and monks, should perfect themselves (Rees 1988; Evans 1968; Brown 1972: 183–226). Having left Rome, perhaps because of the invasion of 410, Pelagius had gone to Carthage and then to Palestine. Pelagius’ more radical follower Caelestius had been condemned for rejecting infant baptism by a Carthaginian synod, perhaps in 411, and Augustine had been preaching and writing against Pelagianism since that time. Orosius probably brought some of these anti-Pelagian writings with him to strengthen Jerome’s position against Pelagius, at a time when Pelagius’ position was strengthened by the politically powerful patronage of Bishop John of Jerusalem.

In Palestine Orosius confronted Pelagius directly in an informal meeting before Bishop John in July, and in December a synod formally took up the question of Pelagianism. In both cases Orosius and Jerome were defeated (Hunt 1982: 202–20; Kelly 1975: 317–21). Orosius’
Liber Apologeticus
, written at the end of 415, is a pamphlet which tries to explain his loss, in part by claiming that Pelagius’ work, written in Latin, could not be properly understood in the Greek-speaking east. His failures likely made him unwelcome in Jerusalem, and he returned to Africa in 416.

On his departure from the east, Orosius carried relics of St Stephen, along with an account of their recent discovery by Lucian, which were to be brought to Bishop Palchonius of his native Bracara. After delivering a letter (
ep
. 134) from Jerome to Augustine, he set out for Africa by way of Minorca. Unable to continue on to Spain, presumably because of barbarian incursions, he was forced to return to Africa and to abandon the relics on the island, where they were responsible for numerous miracles (Hunt 1982). In Africa he wrote his major work,
Seven Books of History Against the Pagans
, and is not heard from again after its completion in 418. Perhaps he died in a shipwreck on his return to Spain.

Work

Orosius’
History
was tremendously successful and became one of the primary sources of information about antiquity in the Middle Ages. Its reception among moderns has been substantially cooler. The sources Orosius drew upon have generally survived, and his sloppiness and constant rhetorical asides have not won him favor. But while his recounting of the facts is often unimpressive, his complex systematizing reveals his bold and original mind.
The History against the Pagans
sought to encompass a large part of world history with a geographical and chronological scope which exceeded most of the other narrative historians of later antiquity.

The sources upon which Orosius depended are well known. For his treatment of the Roman republic, he drew heavily upon Livy, garnering information from all but eight books of the 142 of the
Ab Urbe Condita
. Orosius also used Caesar’s
Gallic Wars
, the republican material of Eutropius, and the second-century epitomator Florus. For the history of the east, of Greece, and of Carthage, Orosius looked particularly to the epitome of Pompeius Trogus prepared by Justin. He also used the
Chronicle
of Eusebius, as translated and supplemented by Jerome, and found a bit of information about Babylon in Herodotus. For the imperial period, Orosius continued to depend upon the
Chronicle
, Florus, and Eutropius, with added material from Tacitus and Suetonius. Further information was derived from Rufinus’ translation of Eusebius’
Ecclesiastical History
and, for the fourth century, Rufinus’ continuation of the work. For the last twenty years of the work, Orosius depended upon oral sources and his own recollections.

Orosius’ style is typical of late Latin rhetorical writers (Bartalucci 1976; Fabbrini 1979: 110–25). Both Augustine (
ep
. 166) and Gennadius (
vir. ill
. 39) describe him as “eloquent,” and he displays the expected features of late Latin eloquence: frequent use of chiasmus, alliteration, and personification, elaborate metaphors, and the use of poetic language and allusions to Vergil to evoke pathos or excitement.

Orosius dedicates his work to Augustine and reveals that he wrote it in response to a request from the bishop for details to support his position against the pagans. Pagans disturbed by the recent sack of Rome had been claiming that disasters had multiplied as the worship of idols ceased and Christianity spread. It seems that Augustine asked Orosius to research the “histories and annals” and compile a list of all sorts of misfortunes – war, disease, famine, natural disasters – with the goal of demonstrating that
misfortunes had not increased with the spread of Christianity, but were constant throughout history. Orosius was asked to list these misfortunes “systematically and briefly.” Orosius’ excessively servile tone in the preface, including a lengthy comparison of himself with a dog, has sometimes blinded readers to the fact that he substantially exceeded Augustine’s mandate both in the length and in the complexity of his work. A hint of what is to come appears in Orosius’ musings toward the end of the prologue. “I discovered that past times were not only equally as grave as those of today, but that they were even more terrible in accordance with how much more distant they were from the assistance of the true religion” (
1.pref. 14
). In Augustine’s
City of God
, the bishop would make the case that suffering is found at all times and is a fundamental part of earthly human existence. For Orosius, however, suffering had been endemic in pre-Christian times, but with the coming of Christ and the spread of Christianity, suffering had been substantially reduced and would continue to diminish with the further spread of the gospel.

Orosius was extremely ambitious, and he set out to write a true universal history which would cover the history of all peoples and of all time. He first postulated a division of time into three great parts: from Adam to Romulus, from Romulus to Christ, and from Christ to the present day (1.1.5–6). The seven books of the history are arranged in accordance with this division: the first division is covered in book 1, the second in books 2 through 6, and the last in book 7. The books vary greatly in length, and in particular the last book is more than two-thirds the length of the second through the sixth books combined.

The scope of the seven books can be briefly summarized. Book 1 covered 1,307 years, from the reign of the Assyrian king Ninus to the founding of Rome (2060–753). Book 2 brings the story up to the Gallic invasion of 390 (363 years), with the inclusion of events in Persia and Greece. Book 3 covers 109 years up to 281 and describes, in addition to Roman affairs, the wars of Philip, Alexander, and his successors. Book 4 treats the three Punic Wars and ends in 146 (136 years). Like book 4, book 5 is entirely Roman and brings the story up to the uprising of Spartacus in AD 73 (73 years). Book 6 covers 73 years and ends with the triumph of Augustus and the coming of Christ, two events closely linked in Orosius’ view of history. The last book, book 7, treats the history of the empire from Augustus to the advent of pacific Gothic leaders such as Ataulf and Wallia in 417.

Orosius begins with Adam in order to emphasize the importance of original sin to his concept of history. This may reflect his concerns with the issues which Pelagianism had raised. Certain preoccupations which will color the entire history are adumbrated in the first chapter of the first book. The evils enumerated throughout his history, he says, have their roots in the sin of Adam. Evils which existed in the past, and which continue to exist “to some extent” today, “are undoubtedly either obvious sins or the hidden punishments of sins” (1.1.12–13). In particular, war is always to be considered an evil, since what are wars but “evils befalling one side or the other”?

After Orosius’ discussion of Adam demonstrates that his work will be universal in time, he provides a lengthy chapter on the geography of the world which reveals that his work will also be universal in space (Corsini 1968: 73–83; Janvier 1982). Orosius’ geography is in general accord with the state of geographical knowledge in his time and depends ultimately, through an intermediate source or sources, on the map of the world made by Agrippa for his father-in-law, the emperor Augustus. The inclusion of geographical information is quite common in classical historiography, and thus Orosius seeks to emphasize the historical element of his work over the apologetic element. But his presentation of the geography of the entire world at the beginning of the work differs from the traditional geographic digression in a more typical history, which covers only the specific portion of the world which has come into the ambit of the historical narrative. Instead, Orosius reveals the importance of the entire world to his history. “Among Romans, as I have said, I am a Roman; among Christians, a Christian; among men, a man. … I enjoy every land temporarily as my homeland, because what is truly my homeland and what I love, is not entirely on this earth” (5.2.6).