¹ First published in Kipling, Rudyard, Rewards and Fairies (London: Macmillan, 1910) 175.Google Scholar

² The identities of these two protagonists vary in different versions of the story; see Gunther, John J., “The Meaning and Origin of the Name ‘Judas Thomas,’” Le Muséon 93 (1980) 113–48Google Scholar. Drijvers, Han J. W., “Facts and Problems in Early Syriac Speaking Christianity,” SecCent 2 (1982) 157–75Google Scholar, at 160, believes Thaddaeus to be Eusebius's poor translation of the Syriac name Addai. For a discussion of these names, with earlier bibliography, see Johnson, Scott Fitzgerald, Literary Territories: Cartographical Thinking in Late Antiquity (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016) 111–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

³ Tellingly, the story is found, neither in the 4th-cent. writings of Ephrem, who lived in Edessa for ten years near the end of his life (though there is an oblique reference to the city being blessed by the Son through the hand of his disciple), nor in the mid-6th-cent. Chronicle of Edessa, which drew on the town archives in which the Abgar document was apparently stored. There is also no material record of Christianity for 2nd- or 3rd-cents. Syria. See Brock, Sebastian, “Eusebius and Syriac Christianity,” in Eusebius, Christianity and Judaism (ed. Attridge, Harold and Hata, Gohei; Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 1992) 212–34, at 221–29Google Scholar.

⁴ Bauer, Walter, Orthodoxy and Heresy in Earliest Christianity (ed. Craft, Robert A. and Krodel, Gerhard; trans. a team from the Philadelphia Seminar on Christian Origins; London: SCM Press, 1934; repr. 1964 & 1972)Google Scholar maintained the document was pure fantasy; not all those in agreement have expressed the point so forcefully. See also Koester, Helmut, “GNOMAI DIAPHOROI: The Origin and Nature of Diversification in the History of Early Christianity,” HTR 58 (1965) 279–318 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Han J. W. Drijvers, “Rechtgläubigkeit und Ketzerei im ältesten syrischen Christentum,” in Symposium Syriacum, 1972: célebré dans les jours 26-31 octobre 1972 à l'Institut Pontifical Oriental de Rome (ed. Ignatius Ortiz de Urbina; Orientalia Christiana Analecta 197; Rome: Pontificium Institutum Orientalium Studiorum, 1974) 291–308; idem, Cults and Beliefs at Edessa (Études preliminaires aux religions orientales dans l'Empire romain 82; Leiden: Brill, 1980) 175–96; idem, “The Persistence of Pagan Cults and Practices in Christian Syria,” in East of Byzantium: Syria and Armenia in the Formative Period (ed. Nina G. Garsoïan, Thomas F. Mathews, and Robert W. Thomson; Dumbarton Oaks Symposium, 1980; Washington: Dumbarton Oaks, 1982) 35–45. Drijvers, “Facts and Problems” suggests that the Abgar correspondence was a deliberate response to Manichaeism; Alberto Camplani, “Traditions of Christian Foundation in Edessa: Between Myth and History,” SMSR 75 (2009) 251–78, to Bardesanes.

⁵ In some older literature Abgar VIII is Abgar IX; see Brock, “Eusebius and Syriac Christianity,” 231 n. 21.

⁶ Burkitt, Francis C., Early Eastern Christianity (London: John Murray, 1904)Google Scholar; modified in his later article “Tatian's Diatessaron and the Dutch Harmonies,” JTS 25 (1924) 113–30. See also Turner, Henry E. W., The Pattern of Christian Truth (London, Mowbray, 1954)Google Scholar; Barnard, Leslie W., “The Origins and Emergence of the Church in Edessa during the First Two Centuries A.D.,” VC 22 (1968) 161–75Google Scholar, e.g., at 162; Peretto, Elio, “Il problema degli inizi del cristianesimo in Siria,” Aug. 19 (1979) 197–214 Google Scholar; Segal, Judah B., “When did Christianity Come to Edessa,” in Middle East Studies and Libraries: A Felicitation Volume for Professor J.D. Pearson (ed. Bloomfield, Barry C.; London: Mansell, 1980) 179–91Google Scholar; Gunther, “The Meaning and Origin of the Name ‘Judas Thomas’”; Palmer, Andrew N., “King Abgar of Edessa, Eusebius and Constantine,” in The Sacred Centre as the Focus of Political Interest (ed. Bakker, Hans; Groningen: E. Forsten, 1992)Google Scholar. Fox, Robin Lane, Pagans and Christians in the Mediterranean World from the Second Century AD to the Conversion of Constantine (London: Penguin, 2005) 279–80Google Scholar, leans cautiously towards this theory.

⁷ Briefly, the second theory relies upon a conversion of Abgar VIII in the later 2^nd cent., itself a doubtful proposition. This later conversion is largely based on the 3rd cent. Book of the Laws of the Countries. But both the identification of this text's Abgar with Abgar VIII (based on the fact that the author seems to speak of a contemporary) and the conversion itself (based on a phrase absent from Eusebius's own quotation of the passage in his Preparation of the Gospel 6.10.44 and therefore likely a later interpolation) are problematic. The Byzantine chronographer George Syncellus quotes Sextus Julius Africanus as describing his contemporary Abgar VIII as “a holy man,” but that phrase need imply nothing about either a conversion or its date.

⁸ For the Syriac text and translation see Howard, George, The Teaching of Addai (SBL Texts and Translations 16; Early Christian Literature Series 4; Chico, CA: Scholars Press, 1981)Google Scholar. On dating, see Timothy Barnes, “The Date of the Teaching of Addai” (paper presented at the Oxford Patristics Conference, 1983); Desreumaux, Alain, “La doctrine d'Addai, essai de classement des temoins syriaques et grecs,” Aug 23 (1983) 181–86Google Scholar; Brock, “Eusebius and Syriac Christianity,” 228; and Griffith, Sidney H., “The Doctrina Addai as a Paradigm of Christian Thought in Edessa in the Fifth Century,” Hug 6 (2003) 269–92Google Scholar.

⁹ See Wilkinson, John, Egeria's Travels (Warminster: Aris & Phillips, 1999)Google Scholar. Beyond these early recensions, the Abgar tale has a long afterlife; the sources have been recently gathered and translated into German by Illert, Martin, Die Abgarlegende: Das Christusbild von Edessa (Fontes Christiani 45; Turnhout: Brepols, 2007)Google Scholar. In these later versions, an image of Christ accumulates increasing importance to the detriment of the letter, which never acquired the same status as a relic. See further Cameron, Averil, “The History of the Image of Edessa: The Telling of a Story,” Harvard Ukrainian Studies 7 (1983) 80–94 Google Scholar, and for a more speculative history, Drews, Robert, In Search of the Shroud of Turin: New Light on Its History and Origins (Totowa, NJ: Rowman & Allanheld, 1984)Google Scholar.

¹⁰ A later Armenian historian suggests that the story is derived from the fifth book of Sextus Julius Africanus, which Grabe, John E., Spicilegium Syriacum Sanctorum Patrum (Oxoniæ: e Theatro Sheldoniano, 1698)Google Scholar proposed as Eusebius's source. This would of course seem to contradict Eusebius's own testimony. Discussed in Illert, Die Abgarlegende, 20. On the Edessan archive and the extent of Eusebius's interaction with it, see, e.g., Adler, William, “Christians and the Public Archive,” in A Teacher for All Generations: Essays in Honor of James C. VanderKam. (ed. Mason, Eric et al.; 2 vols.; Leiden: Brill, 2012) 2:917–37, at 935–37Google Scholar, giving a reconstruction compatible with Grabe's suggestion; partly summarized in Adler, William, “The Kingdom of Edessa and the Creation of a Christian Aristocracy,” in Jews, Christians and the Roman Empire: The Poetics of Power in Late Antiquity (ed. Dohrmann, Natalie B. and Reed, Annette Yoshiko; Jewish Culture and Contexts; Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2013) 43–62 Google Scholar, at 48–52.

¹¹ Bauer, Orthodoxy and Heresy, 35–36.

¹² See, e.g., Harrington, Daniel J., “The Reception of Walter Bauer's Orthodoxy and Heresy in Earliest Christianity during the Last Decade,” HTR 73 (1980) 289–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Robinson, Thomas, The Bauer Thesis Examined: Geography of Heresy in the Early Church (Studies in the Bible and Early Christianity 11; Lewiston, NY: Edward Mellen Press, 1988)Google Scholar.

¹³ Brock, “Eusebius and Syriac Christianity,” 212–34.

¹⁴ Mirkovic, Alexander, Prelude to Constantine: The Abgar Tradition in Early Christianity (Studies in the Religion and History of Early Christianity 15; Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 2004) 90–91 Google Scholar.

¹⁵ Mirkovic, Prelude to Constantine, 96–97.

¹⁶ Mendels, Doron, The Media Revolution of Early Christianity: An Essay on Eusebius’ Ecclesiastical History (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1999) 194–96Google Scholar, also briefly mentions the letters as part of Eusebius's promotion of mission as a marketing strategy to a pagan audience. For Mendels, the letters’ significance is their testimony that Christianity's mission began in Jesus's lifetime and in the public sphere (in conformity with the instructions of Matt 10:5–6, since Abgar approaches Jesus, not vice versa). This missionary significance is also mentioned in passing in Palmer, Andrew, “The Place of King Abgar in the Scheme of Eusebius’ Ecclesiastical History ,” Bulletin de l'AELAC 8 (1998) 17–19 Google Scholar, at 17, and Kanaan, Marlène “Jésus et le roi Abgar,” in Vies historiques et romanesques (Connaissance des Pères de l’Église 94; Paris: Éditions Nouvelle Cité, 2004) 12–20 Google Scholar, at 15 (both of which share Mirkovic's misunderstandings of Eusebius's context).

¹⁷ Bauer, Orthodoxy and Heresy, 11; at 36 he even condemns Eusebius's editorial skills, stating: “If the latter had been inclined at all to examine his material critically, such thoughts must have been further from his mind than ever in this case.”

¹⁸ Barnes, Timothy, Constantine and Eusebius (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1981) e.g., 140–41Google Scholar. The condemnation of Eusebius as court theologian was most famously expressed by Burckhardt, Joseph, Die Zeit Constantin's des Grossen (Leipzig: E. A. Seemann, 1853 Google Scholar; repr., 1880), for example at 375 (335 in repr.).

¹⁹ See Kofsky, Aryeh, Eusebius of Caesarea against Paganism (Jewish and Christian Perspectives 3; Leiden: Brill 2000)Google Scholar; Johnson, Aaron, Ethnicity and Argument in Eusebius’ Praeparatio Evangelica (Oxford Early Christian Studies; Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Inowlocki, Sabrina, Eusebius and the Jewish Authors: His Citation Technique in an Apologetic Context (Ancient Judaism and Early Christianity 64; Leiden: Brill, 2006)Google Scholar; Schott, Jeremy M., Christianity, Empire, and the Making of Religion in Late Antiquity (Divinations: Rereading Late Ancient Religion 7; Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Morlet, Sébastien, La ‘Démonstration évangélique’ d'Eusèbe de Césarée: Étude sur l'apologétique chrétienne à l’époque de Constantin (Collection des études augustiniennes. Série Antiquité 187; Paris: Institut d’Études Augustiniennes, 2009)Google Scholar. On Eusebius's exegetical work, see Hollerich, Michael, Eusebius of Caesarea's Commentary on Isaiah: Christian Exegesis in the Age of Constantine (The Oxford Early Christian Series; Oxford: Clarendon, 1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar. The recent edited collection Reconsidering Eusebius: Collected Papers on Literary, Historical and Theological Issues (ed. Sabrina Inowlocki and Claudio Zamagni; Supplements to Vigiliae Christianae. Texts and Studies of Early Christian Life and Language 107; Leiden: Brill, 2011) explicitly excludes the Ecclesiastical History.

²⁰ Exceptions include Gödecke, Monika, Geschichte als Mythos: Eusebs “Kirchengeschichte” (Europäische Hochschulschriften Reihe 23 Theologie 307; Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 1987)Google Scholar; La biografia di origene fra storia e agiografia. Atti del VI Convegno di Studi del Gruppo Italiano di Ricerca su Origene e la Tradizione Alessandrina (ed. Adele Monaci Castagno; Biblioteca di Adamantius 1; Villa Verucchio: Pazzini Stampatore Editore, 2004) 33–50, on Book 6 in particular; and Verdoner, Marie, Narrated Reality: the Historia Ecclesiastica of Eusebius of Caesarea (Early Christianity in the Context of Antiquity 9; Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 2011)Google Scholar, an ahistorical narratological study containing many insightful comments but poorly translated from the Dutch. There are three articles on the Ecclesiastical History in Eusebius of Caesarea: Traditions and Innovations (ed. Aaron Johnson and Jeremy Schott; Hellenic Studies 60; Washington, DC: Center for Hellenic Studies, Trustees for Harvard University, 2013): David DeVore, “Genre and Eusebius’ Ecclesiastical History: Toward a Focused Debate,” 19–49, James Corke-Webster, “Mothers and Martyrdom: Familial Piety and the Model of the Maccabees in Eusebius of Caesarea's Ecclesiastical History,” 51–82 and Elizabeth C. Penland, “The History of the Caesarean Present: Eusebius and Narratives of Origen,” 83–95. See too the introductory volume Johnson, Aaron, Eusebius (Understanding Classics; London: I. B. Tauris, 2013)Google Scholar.

²¹ Mirkovic, Prelude to Constantine, 89–95.

²² Based upon the old and superseded dating theories of Schwartz, Eduard, Eusebius Werke 2 (Griechischen christlichen Schriftsteller der ersten drei Jahrhunderte 9; Leipzig: J. C. Hinrichs'sche Buchhandlung, 1903–1909)Google Scholar and Barnes, Timothy, “The Editions of Eusebius’ Ecclesiastical History ,” GRBS 21 (1980) 191–201 Google Scholar. See Mirkovic, Prelude to Constantine, 107–10.

²³ This follows Burgess, Richard, “The Dates and Editions of Eusebius’ Chronici Canones and Historia Ecclesiastica ,” JTS 48 (1997) 471–504 CrossRefGoogle Scholar. More recent questions have been asked of Burgess’ position by Valerio Neri, “Les éditions de l'Histoire ecclésiastique (livres VIII–IX): bilan critique et perspectives de la recherche,” and Matthieu Cassin, Muriel Debié, and Michel-Yves Perrin, “La question des éditions de l'Histoire ecclésiastique et le livre X,” both in Eusèbe de Césarée. Commentaire, vol. 1: Études d'introduction (ed. Sébastien Morlet and Lorenzo Perrone; Paris: Belles Lettres, Éditions du Cerf, 2012) 151–83, 185–207, critiqued by David DeVore, in a review of Eusèbe de Césarée. Commentaire, vol. 1: Études d'introduction (ed. Sébastien Morlet and Lorenzo Perrone; Paris: Belles Lettres, Éditions du Cerf, 2012), Zeitschrift für antikes Christentum 18 (2014) 138–42, and Johnson, Eusebius, 104–12.

²⁴ See, e.g., Jean Sirinelli, Les vues historiques d'Eusèbe de Césarée durant la période prénicéenne (Dakar: Université de Dakar. Faculté des lettres et sciences humaines. Publications de la Section de langues et littératures, 10; Dakar: Université de Dakar, 1961) 416–17, Barnes, Constantine and Eusebius, 136, and Verdoner, Narrated Reality, 162. See, however, Johnson, Ethnicity and Argument, 153–97, arguing that Eusebius's Preparation for the Gospel cultivates ambivalence and even hostility towards Rome.

²⁵ Verdoner, Marie, “Überlegungen zum Adressaten von Eusebs Historia ecclesiastica ,” Zeitschrift für antikes Christentum 14 (2010) 362–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

²⁶ On Eusebius's Caesarea, see Joseph Patrich, “Caesarea in the Time of Eusebius,” in Reconsidering Eusebius, 1–24 with further bibliography. For more details on the city by the same author, see idem, Studies in the Archaeology and History of Caesarea Maritima: Caput Judaeae, Metropolis Palaestinae (Ancient Judaism and Early Christianity 77; Leiden: Brill, 2011). See, too, Levine, Lee I., Caesarea Under Roman Rule (Studies in Judaism in Late Antiquity 7; Leiden: Brill, 1975)Google Scholar, and Caesarea Maritima: A Retrospective after Two Millennia (ed. Avner Raban and Kenneth G. Holum; Documenta et Monumenta Orientis Antiqui 21; Leiden: Brill, 1996).

²⁷ For examples of Eusebius's complex intertextuality, see Corke-Webster, “Mothers and Martyrdom,” 51–81.

²⁸ See Brock, “Eusebius and Syriac Christianity,” 212. Other passing references to the region include Bardesanes the Syrian (EH 4.30.1–3), a letter on the Paschal controversy from the bishops in Osroëne and its environs (EH 5.23.4), and the Christianization of Armenia (EH 9.8.2).

²⁹ Translations are my own throughout unless otherwise indicated. Greek text of Eusebius from Bardy, Gustave, Eusèbe de Césarée, Histoire ecclésiastique (3 vols.; Sources chrétiennes 41, 55, 73; Paris: Éditions du Cerf, 1952–1958; repr., 1967)Google Scholar.

³⁰ Barnes, Constantine and Eusebius, 129–30; see also 346 n. 15.

³¹ Noted without the prior discussion in Palmer, “The Place of King Abgar,” 17.

³² This paper thus attempts for Eusebius's Greek version of the tale what Griffith does for the Syriac Teaching of Addai; see “The Doctrina Addai as a Paradigm of Christian Thought,” for example at 271.

³³ Kipling, “If–,” in Rewards and Fairies, 176.

³⁴ Their independence is strongly indicated by, among other factors, the fact that the Syriac version is different from the Syriac translation of Eusebius's Ecclesiastical History, which cannot therefore be assumed as the basis for the Teaching of Addai. Hence the consensus position that The Teaching of Addai preserves the original Syriac document that Eusebius used as his source; see e.g., Brock, “Eusebius and Syriac Christianity,” 213; Drijvers, “Facts and Problems,” 160; contra Eduard Schwartz, “Zu Eusebius Kirchengeschichte: II, Zur Abgarlegende,” ZNW 4 (1903) 61–66, at 64; Desreumaux, “La Doctrine d'Addai,” 186. Brock, “Eusebius and Syriac Christianity,” 215–21 helpfully prints the two texts in parallel.

³⁵ The other major difference in the Teaching of Addai is a blessing on Edessa appended to Jesus's reply (f. 3b). More generally, Eusebius makes no mention of the image of Christ that would become so important in later versions of the story. Runciman, Steven, “Some Remarks on the Image of Edessa,” Cambridge Historical Journal 3 (1931) 238–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 241–42, argues, in part on the basis of Eusebius's Letter to Empress Constantia, that Eusebius excised the image of Christ (see n. 4). It seems more likely that the image was simply a later addition since it is absent in Egeria's diary too.

³⁶ Noted in passing in Ramelli, Ilaria L. E., “Possible Historical Traces in the Doctrina Addai ,” Hug 9 (2006) 51–127 Google Scholar, at 63 n. 38.

³⁷ Translation of the Syriac from Howard, The Teaching of Addai.

³⁸ The state of the extant evidence means that we cannot be completely sure that the original Syriac document did not have a written reply from Jesus, subsequently turned into an oral reply in the Teaching of Addai. It is more likely, though, that this is a Eusebian editorial decision given his interest in the letter format. For the direct comparison see Brock, “Eusebius and Syriac Christianity,” 214; noted too by Drijvers, “Facts and Problems,” 162. Drijvers concludes, “The alternative of letter or oral reply is no fundamental question. A dictation given by Jesus and written down by Hanan differs only slightly from a written answer.” But for Eusebius, I suggest, the difference is more significant than Drijvers allows.

³⁹ The translation in Lawlor, Hugh J. and Oulton, John E. L., Eusebius. The Ecclesiastical History and the Martyrs of Palestine (2 vols.; London: SPCK, 1927–28)Google Scholar 1:30 misleadingly refers to a written response (“An apostle of Jesus is come hither, even as He wrote to thee”; “he suspected that it was he of whom Jesus wrote”).

⁴⁰ David DeVore, “Greek Historiography, Roman Society, Christian Empire: The Ecclesiastical History of Eusebius of Caesarea,” Ph.D. diss., University of California, Berkeley, 2013) 1–5, has argued convincingly that this refusal makes Jesus's and Abgar's relationship an example of the classic trope of philosophers invited (and declining) invitations from foreign kings.

⁴¹ Some manuscripts of the Ecclesiastical History (ERBD) have an extra section that emphasizes this further; it includes, for example, the phrase “it is also worth hearing the letter, only a few lines but powerful [ὀλιγοστὶϰου μὲν πολυδυνάμου δὲ ἐπιστολῆς], sent by Jesus to him through the same letter-carrier” (διὰ τοῦ αὐτοῦ γραμματοϰομιστοῦ) (EH 1.13.9). Discussed in Lawlor and Oulton, Eusebius 2:57–58; Greek text taken from Eduard Schwartz, Eusebius Kirchengeschichte (Kleine Ausgabe; Leipzig, J. C. Hinrichs, 1932), at 33 for apparatus.

⁴² Greek text of the New Testament from The Greek New Testament (ed. Kurt Aland et al.; Fourth Revised Edition; Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2007).

⁴³ While the change could also be due to Matthew's theological concerns over Mark's characterization of Jesus as Mary's son, or simply his observation that Jesus never engages in actual labor, scholarly consensus favors the interpretation advanced above. See discussion and extensive bibliography in Keith, Chris, Jesus’ Literacy: Scribal Literacy and the Teacher from Galilee (Library of New Testament Studies 8; Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 2011) 134–39Google Scholar.

⁴⁴ See Metzger, Bruce, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament: A Companion Volume to the United Bible Societies’ Greek New Testament (London: United Bible Societies, 1971) 34 Google Scholar, 88–89.

⁴⁵ See Keith, Jesus’ Literacy, 139–45.

⁴⁶ See Keith, Chris, The Pericope Adulterae, the Gospel of John, and the Literacy of Jesus (New Testament Tools, Studies, and Documents 38; Leiden: Brill, 2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁴⁷ Discussed in Keith, Jesus’ Literacy, 161–63.

⁴⁸ See discussion in Benko, Stephen, Pagan Rome and the Early Christians (Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 1986) 148 Google Scholar. Judgments on Jesus's low origins continue in the modern era, for example in Crossan, John D., The Historical Jesus: The Life of a Mediterranean Jewish Peasant (New York: HarperCollins, 1992)Google Scholar, and idem, Jesus: A Revolutionary Biography (New York: HarperCollins, 1994). In contrast, see Foster, Paul, “Educating Jesus: The Search for a Plausible Context,” JSHJ 4 (2006) 7–33 Google Scholar.

⁴⁹ The characterization of Celsus in Wilken, Robert L., The Christians as the Romans Saw Them (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1984; repr. 2003) 94–125 Google Scholar, as a “conservative intellectual” nicely characterizes his suitability as an exemplar for our purposes, since it was precisely those criticisms emerging from traditional stereotypes that Eusebius most needed to address. Moreover, Celsus paid close attention to the historical Jesus and thus tied common suspicions about Christianity to its founder. See further Miura-Stange, A., Celsus und Origenes: Das Gemeinsame ihrer Weltanschauung (Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der älteren Kirche 4; Giessen: Topelmann, 1926)Google Scholar, Andreson, Carl, Logos und Nomos. Die Polemik des Kelsos wider das Christentum (Arbeiten zur Kirchen Geschichte 30; Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1955)CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and Gallagher, Eugene V., Divine Man or Magician? Celsus and Origen on Jesus (Society of Biblical Literature Dissertation Series 64; Chico: Scholars Press, 1982)Google Scholar.

⁵⁰ Greek text of Celsus from Borret, Marcel, Origène. Contre Celse (4 vols.; Sources chrétiennes 132, 136, 147, 150; Paris: Éditions du Cerf, 1967–1969)Google Scholar.

⁵¹ A more positive view of Jesus's intelligence does seem to have existed among pagans, particularly in the later period. Augustine observes that pagan critics seek to deny Jesus's divinity and make him only “the wisest of men” (sapientissimum virum) (On the Harmony of the Gospels 1.8). I note again, though, that this acknowledgement is also supposedly part of a wider pagan query as to “why the lord has written nothing himself” (cur ipse Dominus nihil scripserit) (On the Harmony of the Gospels 1.7.11, 1.7.12). Wilken, The Christians as the Romans Saw Them, 144–45 and 151–53, suggests that Augustine had Porphyry in view here, as he did in City of God 19.23. Equally, Eusebius might have had Porphyry in mind when he sets out to argue against those who consider Christianity an “unreasoning faith” (ἀλόγῳ δὲ πίστει) (Preparation for the Gospel 1.3.1). Lactantius, Divine Institutes 4.13 seems to acknowledge a tension between exactly two such opposing pagan attitudes to Jesus's intelligence.

⁵² We might compare Eusebius's treatment of the historical Jesus in Demonstration of the Gospel 3.3–7, e.g., at 3.7.3.

⁵³ Compare the possibility muted in Foster, “Educating Jesus,” 31, that the description of Jesus's education in The Gospel of Thomas 6.15 is imported from Greco-Roman models of primary education, as described for example by Quintilian, Institutes of Oratory 1.1.25.

⁵⁴ It is true that Jesus's epistle does not match the length or elaboration of much contemporary elite correspondence. But it did provide clear proof of Jesus's literacy, which had been a major prop to allegations of low status. And in addressing the latter the prominence of the correspondent likely made up for the brevity of the correspondence.

⁵⁵ Kipling, “If–,” in Rewards and Fairies, 176.

⁵⁶ Moss, Candida, The Other Christs: Imitating Jesus in Ancient Christian Ideologies of Martyrdom (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010) 3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁵⁷ For a survey of varying early Christian use of imitatio Christi, see Moss, The Other Christs, 19–44.

⁵⁸ This is not to reject the warnings about homogenizing a geographically and chronologically disparate set of texts; see e.g., Moss, Candida, Ancient Christian Martyrdom: Diverse Practices, Theologies, and Traditions (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2012) 7 Google Scholar.

⁵⁹ See Shaw, Brent D, “Body/Power/Identity: Passions of the Martyrs,” JECS 4 (1996) 269–312 Google Scholar, Cooper, Kate, “The Voice of the Victim: Gender, Representation, and Early Christian Martyrdom,” BJRL 80 (1998) 147–57Google Scholar, Young, Robin Darling, In Procession Before the World: Martyrdom as Public Liturgy in Early Christianity (Père Marquette lecture in theology 2001; Milwaukee, WI: Marquette University Press, 2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar, Castelli, Elizabeth, Martyrdom and Memory: Early Christian Culture Making (New York: Columbia University Press, 2004)Google Scholar, Perkins, Judith, Roman Imperial Identities in the Early Christian Era (Routledge Monographs in Classical Studies; London: Routledge, 2009)Google Scholar.

⁶⁰ The literature on Perpetua is vast. See especially Shaw, Brent D., “The Passion of Perpetua,” Past & Present 139 (1993) 3–45 CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and Cooper, Kate, “A Father, a Daughter, and a Procurator: Authority and Resistance in the Prison Memoir of Perpetua of Carthage,” Gender and History 23 (2011) 685–702 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁶¹ Latin text taken from van Beek, Cornelius I. M. I, Passio Sanctarum Perpetuae et Felicitas (Nijmegen: Dekker and Van de Vegt, 1936)Google Scholar.

⁶² See the powerful media value of martyrs suggested by Mendels, The Media Revolution, 51–109. I am not arguing that Eusebius sought to “write out” martyrs from Christian history; their profusion in the Ecclesiastical History, as well as in the twin recensions of his earlier Martyrs of Palestine and the sadly lost collection of ancient martyr narratives (EH 4.15.47, 5.pr.2, 5.4.3, 5.21.5) are clear testimony to his interest. Rather, I am suggesting that he alters the focus and tone of these stories, of which his picture of Jesus is here programmatic.

⁶³ Engberg, Jakob, “Martyrdom and Persecution – Pagan Perspectives on the Prosecution and Execution of Christians c. 110–210,” in Contextualising Early Christian Martyrdom (ed. Engberg, Jakob, Holmsgaard Eriksen, Uffe, and Petersen, Anders Klostergaard; ECCA 8; Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 2010) 96 Google Scholar.

⁶⁴ Greek text from Harmon, Austin M., Lucian: Volume V (Loeb Classical Library 302; Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1969)Google Scholar. For comment see e.g., Betz, Hans D., “Lukian von Samosata und das Christentum,” NovT 3 (1959) 226–37Google Scholar; and Edwards, Mark J., “Satire and Verisimilitude: Christianity in Lucian's ‘Peregrinus,’” Historia 38 (1989) 89–98 Google Scholar; Benko, Pagan Rome, 30–53.

⁶⁵ See James Corke-Webster, “Author and Authority: Literary Representations of Moral Authority in Eusebius of Caesarea's The Martyrs of Palestine,” in Christian Martyrdom in Late Antiquity: History and Discourse, Tradition and Religious Identity (ed. Peter Gemeinhardt and Johan Leemans; Arbeiten zur Kirchengeschichte 116; Berlin: De Gruyter, 2012) 51–78, arguing that in this prequel to the Ecclesiastical History, Eusebius develops a new model of the interactions between martyrs and Roman officials. Rather than representative clashes between opposing worldviews, they are stylized tableaux of the passive endurance by temperate, altruistic martyrs of abuse inflicted by intemperate, illegitimate exemplars of Roman authority unworthy of the official positions they hold. See further idem, “Violence and Authority in Eusebius of Caesarea's Ecclesiastical History” (Ph.D. diss., University of Manchester, 2013) 183–234.

⁶⁶ Moss, The Other Christs, 5–6, see too 107.

⁶⁷ Kipling, “If–,” in Rewards and Fairies, 176.

⁶⁸ In the Teaching of Addai, this anti-Jewish sentiment is tempered by various apparently sympathetic gestures towards the Jews. Given that the gradual accretions to the Teaching of Addai enhance rather than subdue the anti-Jewish sentiment, it is at least possible that Eusebius has removed this apparently pro-Jewish detail. See further Drijvers, Han J.W., “Jews and Christians at Edessa,” JJS 36 (1985) 88–102 CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 91–92.

⁶⁹ Eusebius cannot, however, be accused of simple anti-Semitism. See Ulrich, Jörg, Euseb von Caesarea und die Juden. Studien zur Rolle der Juden in der Theologie des Eusebius von Caesarea (Patristische Texte und Studien 49; Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar and in particular his distinction between “Hebrews” and “Jews” in Eusebius's thought; see too Verdoner, Narrated Reality, 145–47. Eusebius will, however, unhesitatingly tar the Jews if it enables him to exculpate the Romans (and note that it is Jews rather than Hebrews who are so blamed) and does so repeatedly in the Ecclesiastical History (see especially EH 4.15.26; 4.15.29; 4.15.41–43). Tabbernee, William, “Eusebius’ ‘Theology of Persecution’: As Seen in the Various Editions of His Church History,” JECS 5 (1997) 319–34Google Scholar, at 323, posits that blaming the Jews was the earliest stage of Eusebius's evolving views of “persecution.” On Eusebius's treatment of the Jews in the Preparation for the Gospel and Demonstration of the Gospel, see Kofsky, Aryeh, “Eusebius of Caesarea and the Christian-Jewish Polemic,” in Contra Iudaeos: Ancient and Christian Polemics between Christians and Jews (ed. Limor, Ora and Stroumsa, Guy; Texts and Studies in Medieval and Early Modern Judaism 10; Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr, 1996) 59–83 Google Scholar.

⁷⁰ This also fits Roman ideas of “just war” as motivated by retaliation or revenge; see further Albert, Sigrid, Bellum iustum: Die Theorie des “gerechten Krieges” und ihre praktische Bedeutung für die auswärtigen Auseinandersetzungen Roms in republikanischer Zeit (Frankfurter Althistorische Studien 10; Kallmünz: Lassleben 1980)Google Scholar.

⁷¹ In this, he goes further even than the later author of the Teaching of Addai, who imagines Abgar writing indignantly to the emperor Tiberius “concerning that which the Jews did with respect to the Cross” (Teaching of Addai f. 24a).

⁷² On Eusebius's understanding of salvation history, the destruction of the Temple was also important in confirming that Moses's law and the old covenant had been superseded; see e.g., Demonstration of the Gospel 1.6.39–40, discussed in Kofsky, “Eusebius of Caesarea and the Christian-Jewish Polemic,” 82.

⁷³ The idea of suffering as God's judgment on his own people is of course a common Old Testament motif, to which Eusebius's debt is evident in his extensive quotation and paraphrase from Jeremiah and the Psalms. Grant, Robert, “Eusebius and Imperial Propaganda,” in Eusebius, Christianity, and Judaism (ed. Attridge, Harold W. and Hata, Göhei; Detroit: Wayne State University, 1992) 658–84Google Scholar, at 664, suggests, however, that Eusebius might also have inherited the idea from 1 Clement 3, which Eusebius certainly knew (EH 3.16.1, 3.38.1, 4.23.11, 5.6.3).

⁷⁴ Tabbernee, “Eusebius’ ‘Theology of Persecution,’” 326.

⁷⁵ Tabbernee's schema is also flawed since it relies on a chronological compositional sequence rendered obsolete in the very year he published his article, when Burgess, “The Dates and Editions,” demonstrated that Eusebius's first edition included not Books 1–7 but Books 1–9.

⁷⁶ Noted in passing by Illert, Die Abgar Legende, 18–19.

⁷⁷ See discussion in Griffith, “The Doctrina Addai as a Paradigm of Christian Thought,” 274 n. 16; also Ramelli, “Possible Historical Traces,” 53, 95.

⁷⁸ Something similar is hinted at by Marie Verdoner, Narrated Reality, 171, who suggests that Eusebius is here emphasizing Christianity's universality.

⁷⁹ I note that Eusebius stresses that Jesus's ministry is associated with Judaea (EH 1.9.2–1.10.1, 1.13.1), and that the letter is sent explicitly to Jerusalem (EH 1.13.5), i.e., places within imperial control.

⁸⁰ Noted, for example, in Verdoner, Narrated Reality, 161.

⁸¹ Brock, “Eusebius and Syriac Christianity,” 320 n. 11.

⁸² In the Teaching of Addai, Abgar's initial interest in Jesus comes while an embassy from Edessa is visiting a Roman governor, a detail absent from Eusebius's account. This might well be a later addition, but it is noteworthy that the majority of such additions are at the end of the narrative, not the start. It is therefore possible that Eusebius has removed this detail, perhaps to emphasize the agency of Jesus in bringing Edessa and Rome closer together.

⁸³ Another contributory motivation might be Eusebius's desire to boast about Christianity's reach at this stage, as suggested in Verdoner, Narrated Reality, 171. DeVore, “Greek Historiography, Roman Society, Christian Empire,” 4, suggests that discussions of foreign kings were a standard circumlocution for speaking obliquely about emperors. But Eusebius happily speaks explicitly about emperors, good or bad, elsewhere.

⁸⁴ For Edessa's position on multiple trade routes see Segal, Judah B., Edessa: The Blessed City (Oxford: Clarendon, 1970)Google Scholar 3–4, 29–31, 42; for the military significance of its location, 5–6. See further Han J.W. Drijvers, “Hatra, Palmyra und Edessa. Die Stadte der syrisch-mesopotamischen Wuste in politischer, kulturgeschichtlicher und religiongeschichtlicher Beleuchtung,” ANRW II.8 (Berlin: De Gruyter, 1977) 864, and Millar, Fergus, The Roman Near East (Carl Newell Jackson Lectures; Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1993) 437–88Google Scholar.

⁸⁵ It should be noted that contrary to Dio's account, Plutarch's Life of Crassus ascribes little blame to the Edessenes or their king. On Eusebius's possible knowledge of Dio, see Carriker, Andrew, The Library of Eusebius of Caesarea (Supplements to Vigiliae Christianae 67; Leiden: Brill, 2003) 151–54Google Scholar.

⁸⁶ Brock, “Eusebius and Syriac Christianity,” 10–11, associates the death of Abgar with this revolt, since the likely date of Abgar's death is 115/116, twenty-six years later than the date of 89/90 recorded in the eighth-cent. Syriac Chronicle of Zuqnin (= Chronicle of Ps-Dionysius of Tell-Mahre). Either Abgar was its instigator and killed by the Romans, or he was a victim of the rebels. See further Ross, Steven K., Roman Edessa: Politics and Culture on the Eastern Fringes of the Roman Empire, 114–242 CE (London: Routledge, 2001) 34 Google Scholar.

⁸⁷ See discussion in Ross, Roman Edessa, 36–37, disagreeing with Drijvers, Cults and Beliefs at Edessa. While the coins of King Ma'nu under Verus and Marcus Aurelius carry the legend “friend of the Romans” and images of the two Roman emperors, earlier bronze coins depict a temple or a bust of a Parthian king (potentially Vologaeses III).

⁸⁸ The nature of this act is unclear; Ross, Roman Edessa, 46–50, considers it an attempt to oust the Romans from the region entirely, rather than an act in support of Septimius's rival Niger.

⁸⁹ On Septimius Severus in Dio see Millar, Fergus, A Study of Cassius Dio (Oxford: Clarendon, 1964) 138–50Google Scholar.

⁹⁰ The extent of their “punishment” is unclear; see further Ross, Roman Edessa, 50–53, and the review article by Kaizer, Ted, “The Near East in the Hellenistic and Roman Periods between Local, Regional and Supra-Regional Approaches,” Scripta Classica Israelica 22 (2003) 283–95Google Scholar, at 290–91.

⁹¹ On this deceit see Millar, A Study of Cassius Dio, 154. On the dating and impact of this change see Millar, Fergus, “The Roman Coloniae of the Near East: A Study of Cultural Relations,” in Roman Eastern Policy and Other Studies in Roman History: Proceedings of a Colloquium at Tvärminne 2-3 October 1987 (ed. Solin, Heikki and Kajava, Mika; Commentationes Humanarum Litterarum 91; Helsinki: Finnish Society of Sciences and Letters, 1990) 7–58 Google Scholar, at 46–50; repr. in Rome, the Greek World, and the East: The Greek World, The Jews and the East (ed. Hannah M. Cotton and Guy M. Rogers; Studies in the History of Greece and Rome; Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2004) 164–222, at 208–13. On the inscriptional evidence, see in particular Duncan-Jones, Richard, “Praefectus Mesopotamiae et Osrhoenae,” CP 64 (1969) 229–33Google Scholar and “Praefectus Mesopotamiae et Osrhoenae: A Postscript,” CP 65 (1970) 107–9.

⁹² Caracalla's trip might have been motivated by a memorial for Crassus's earlier defeat in the region; see Mattern-Parkes, Susan P., “The Defeat of Crassus and the Just War,” The Classical World 96 (2003) 387–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 393 n. 39, and Hekster, Olivier and Kaizer, Ted, “An accidental tourist? Caracalla's fatal trip to the temple of the Moon at Carrhae/Harran,” Ancient Society 42 (2012) 89–107.Google Scholar A speech of Severus Alexander claiming that “I have taken back the lands between the rivers—those of Mesopotamia of course—abandoned by that foul brute” (Historia Augusta, Life of Severus Alexander 56.6) might refer to further troubles in the region under Elagabalus.

⁹³ Traditional scholarship believed there was further Edessene unrest when Abgar X regained the throne briefly towards the end of the first half of the third cent., a thesis based upon a switch from Greek to Syriac in the period's documentation. Ross, Roman Edessa, 69–82, however demonstrates using recently discovered papyri that Gordian III gifted this land to Abgar (indicating further Rome's favor towards the region in spite of the recurring trouble).

⁹⁴ See Frye, Richard N., The History of Ancient Iran (Munich: Beck, 1984)Google Scholar.

⁹⁵ And, indeed, discussion of the region may have conjured up the city, if Osroëne indeed derives from the native name of Edessa, Orhay. Discussed in Segal, The Blessed City, 9–10.

⁹⁶ Barnes, Timothy, A New Empire of Diocletian and Constantine (Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press, 1982) 206, 221–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁹⁷ Benko, Pagan Rome, 23–24, notes well the significance for Romans of Christianity's associations with the Jews, whose political relationship with Rome in the 1^st and 2^nd cent. CE was notably fractious.

⁹⁸ Wilken, The Christians as the Romans Saw Them, 117–25, at 125.

⁹⁹ Latin text from Jackson, John, Tacitus: Volume IV (Loeb Classical Library 312; Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1937)Google Scholar.

¹⁰⁰ See, e.g., Mirkovic, Prelude to Constantine, 103–4.

¹⁰¹ Interestingly, Tacitus similarly exaggerates, labeling Abgar “king of the Arabs” (rexque Arabum) (Tacitus, Ann. 12.12). On the actual (rather more limited) range of Edessan authority, see Segal, The Blessed City, 23–24.

¹⁰² The other named Edessan Thaddaeus heals, ‘Abdu son of ‘Abdu, was also likely of political significance—either a leading officer or perhaps heir apparent (though this is clearer in the Teaching of Addai f.4a). See further Segal, The Blessed City, 19.

¹⁰³ Kipling, “If–,” in Rewards and Fairies, 176.

¹⁰⁴ This model is employed by Moss, The Other Christs, who takes it from Castelli, Elizabeth, Imitating Paul: A Discourse of Power (Literary Currents in Biblical Interpretation; Louisville, KY: Westminster, 1991)Google Scholar.

¹⁰⁵ Morgan, Teresa, “Eusebius of Caesarea and Christian Historiography,” Athenaeum 93 (2005) 193–208 Google Scholar, argues that the Ecclesiastical History is not a narrative of evolution but a history of a church that has replicated itself unchanged since its earliest days.

¹⁰⁶ My current monograph project explores in more detail this vision and the means by which Eusebius achieves it.