Jeremy Schott. The History of the Church: a New Translation. University of California Press, 2019
Eusebius’ Ecclesiastical History stands as one of the most studied Christian texts from the fourth century. In addition to numerous monographs on its theology or historiographical method, the Ecclesiastical History has remained a critical resource for reconstructing the first three centuries of Christianity. The popularity of Eusebius’ Ecclesiastical History is not only a modern phenomenon. As early as the fourth century, Eusebius was known as the “Father of Church History” who provided the foundation for the accounts of later ecclesiastical historians.[1] The popularity of the History has given rise to multiple English translations of the Ecclesiastical History: A.C. McGiffert’s in the Ante-Nicene Fathers, Kirsopp Lake’s in the Loeb Classical Library, Roy J. Deferrari’s in the Fathers of the Church series, and G.A. Williamson’s Penguin Classics edition.[2] In addition to the translation, the demanding nature of the history, full of citations and obscure references, almost necessitates reference materials to aid the reader, a feature of almost all English versions of the Ecclesiastical History.
Schott begins with an introduction to Eusebius, the Ecclesiastical History, and the goals and methods of his translation (1-30). Schott highlights how Eusebius constructed his historical account to achieve very specific theological and ideological aims. Even the occasional, oblique autobiographical passages are part of his larger project. As Schott skillfully describes, this rhetorical framing characterizes much of ancient historiography, but Eusebius elevates this genre to the “totalizing discourse” of “early Christian rhetoric.” Taking his cue from the first sentence of the Ecclesiastical History, Schott delineates the major themes of Eusebius’ text: The Apostolic/Episcopal Successions (17), Ecclesiastical Literature and Men of Letters (17-18), Heresiology (18-19), Fate of the Jews/supersessionist Ideology (19-20), Persecution and Martyrdom (21-22), and Ultimate Triumph (22-24). Alongside these internal literary themes, Schott discusses events contemporaneous with the composition of the Ecclesiastical History, including the Diocletianic Persecution, the rise of Constantine, and the controversy over writings of Origen.
The introduction to the work as a whole is supplemented by brief introductions at the beginning of each book. These additions also provide analysis of the major literary, theological, and historical themes of each section. They also provide small bibliographies of “Parallel and Related Sources.” These lists regularly feature authors such as Josephus, Christian writers quoted or cited by Eusebius, and various books of the New Testament, but Schott also points the reader to relevant historiographical texts (e.g. Tacitus, Cassius Dio) and, where available, texts written by Christian groups Eusebius deems heretical. Schott’s work ends with a bibliography arranged by topics that point the reader to translations of Eusebius’ works (where they exist) and secondary literature on some of the major themes Schott has previously identified as critical (515-524). This bibliography has been carefully curated to include some of the best works in English on Eusebius as of the translation’s publication in 2019. Finally, Schott provides the appendices and study aids that translations of the Ecclesiastical History have included in the past: lists of Emperors and Bishops (503-508), maps (493-502), and glossary (509-515). The latter is particularly important for Schott’s translation due to his translation method.
Schott opts to translate certain technical terms and words freighted with theological import with their English cognates. For instance, Schott translates logos theou as “the Logos of God,” rather than “God’s Word,’ and Justin’s apologia pro Christianos as “Justin’s Apology for the Christians” rather than “Justin’s Defense of the Christians.” Schott is also careful to signal when and how Eusebius is using a citation formula (24-26). These editorial decisions aid the reader, clarifying when Eusebius may simply be using an oral tradition and where he may be copying from a book he has at hand. Of course, as Schott notes, the meaning of each of these citation formulas is not entirely stable. Along with his discussion of Eusebius’ citational practices in the introduction, the reader is well prepared to recognize these formulas and their potential import.
Schott’s translation requires dedication on the part of the reader who may need to use the glossary, but also renders the Greek language and rhetorical techniques Eusebius employs more visible. Schott not only includes the chapter and verse numbers standard for citation, but he also avoids adding his own titles, preferring to translate Eusebius’ own headings originally intended as an aid to his readers (28-29). The total effect of Schott’s translation and presentation of Eusebius’ Ecclesiastical History is to bring the Greek text and its organizational agenda slightly closer to the reader. For instance, in IV.8.3, Eusebius mentions Justin Martyr who was a “genuine lover of true philosophy,” had trained in the “learning of the Hellenes,” and written an “Apology.” In this one sentence, Schott gestures toward an easily occluded ethno-religious valence by using the word “Hellenes” (rather than opting for “Greeks”), maintains the ancient rhetorical language for Justin’s text, and, in a footnote, the pederastic connotations of the word translated as “love” (erastês).
Jeremy Schott’s translation is a remarkable work of scholarship. The translator manages to convey the idiosyncrasies and ancient conventions of Eusebius’ Greek palpable to English-speaking readers. This text-oriented approach to translation allows those familiar with Greek to confidently follow while also allowing those unfamiliar to sense some of the text’s particularities apart from the translator's gloss. Moreover, Schott guides his readers through the text with editorial additions and a judicious use of footnotes, and the bibliography he includes provides further avenues for research. While I will never throw out my well-worn and thoroughly marked Penguin Classics version of Eusebius’ text, Schott’s translation has certainly become the first I turn to when needing an English version of the Ecclesiastical History.
[1] Sébastien Morlet, La Démonstration Évangélique D’Eusèbe De Césarée, (Brepols: Paris, 2009) 7 ff1.
[2] This is to name only some of the most read and cited translations of the Ecclesiastical History.
Peter Z. Fraser-Morris is a doctoral candidate in Judaism and Christianity in Antiquity at the University of Virginia.