Papers by Richard M Pollard
A Companion to Josephus in the Medieval West, 2024
This article explores whether the Jewish historian Flavius Josephus was viewed as a Church Father... more This article explores whether the Jewish historian Flavius Josephus was viewed as a Church Father in the early Middle Ages (500-1000), and especially during the Carolingian period (8th-9th centuries). Though Josephus was widely cited by medieval scholars for his historical insights, he wasn't officially considered a Church Father. However, his influence on Biblical interpretation and medieval scholarship was significant: his authority sometimes exceeded that of newer Fathers like Bede, making him a sort of "Church Grandfather".
Brill Encyclopedia of Early Christianity, 2024
This article is an overview of the "De excidio Hierosolymitano" (On the Ruin of Jerusalem). This ... more This article is an overview of the "De excidio Hierosolymitano" (On the Ruin of Jerusalem). This work is a Christianized Latin retelling of Flavius Josephus’ "Bellum Judaicum" (Jewish War), dating back to around 368–375 CE. Traditionally misattributed to Josephus until the mid-9th century, many today anachronistically call it the (Ps.) Hegesippus. The article explores the contents, historiography, authorship, and reception of the text. It particularly emphasizes how the narrative of Josephus' Jewish War was reshaped to align with Christian perspectives, depicting Christians as the rightful successors of the Jews as God’s chosen people. The analysis also delves into the linguistic aspects, the exclusion of certain original contents, and the inclusion of additional Christian narratives. The article also delves into the text's historical context, its use in Christian polemics, and its influence across various genres in medieval and early Christian literature.
In This Modern Age: Medieval Studies in Honor of Paul Edward Dutton (eds. Courtney Booker and Anne Latowsky), 2023
People in Antiquity and the early Middle Ages sneezed, just as today. Few historians have conside... more People in Antiquity and the early Middle Ages sneezed, just as today. Few historians have considered what they did in response, however, and what they thought about this disruptive reflex. This chapter shows that while sneezes were indeed linked with divination, as has long been recognized, they had myriad other associations. Their role in augury and particularly the Bible may have lent them an unsavory character. Nonetheless, sneezes retained an important role in medicine, and this could have influenced the content of medieval gardens. More notable than anything else is the silence of the early medieval sneeze: never associated with the plague, it is likewise absent from whole genres of literature. We do not even know what someone would have said to a sneezer in this era.
Revue d'études augustiniennes et patristiques, 2021
Nous n’avons pas d’idée précise de qui appartenait exactement à la catégorie des « pères de l’Égl... more Nous n’avons pas d’idée précise de qui appartenait exactement à la catégorie des « pères de l’Église » au début du Moyen Âge, ni même de la manière dont cette catégorie était alors. Les revendications d’autorité patristique ou quasi-patristique sont impossibles à confirmer (ou à réfuter) pour un auteur particulier. Or, Heinz Schreckenberg a affirmé que Flavius Josèphe (37-100 ap. J.-C.) avait presque atteint le statut de père de l’Église, même si nous n’avons qu’une idée sommaire de la réception de Josèphe. Cet article préliminaire a pour but d’aborder les questions de savoir qui (et quoi) constituait un père de l’Église à cette époque, et quelle était la position de Josèphe à leurs côtés. Pour y répondre, nous userons de techniques quantitatives, dont beaucoup sont empruntées à l’histoire des sciences. Nous examinerons des données telles que le nombre de manuscrits, la concomitance dans les manuscrits, les entrées dans les catalogues des bibliothèques, les « co-citations », les annotations, et même certaines analyses qualitatives pour brosser un tableau plus large et plus nuancé des premiers Pères médiévaux. Josèphe n’était probablement pas considéré comme un « Père » pour la plupart des savants du haut Moyen Âge, mais l’étendue et la profondeur de son autorité étaient surprenantes.
----
We have little idea who exactly belonged to the category of « Church father » in the early Middle Ages, or how this category was even defined in this period. As such, it remains impossible to confirm or refute claims of Patristic or quasi-Patristic status or authority for a particular author. Indeed, Heinz Schreckenberg claimed that Flavius Josephus (37-100 CE) almost attained the status of a Church father, even though we still have only a sketchy idea of Josephus’ reception. This preliminary article uses quantitative techniques, many borrowed from the history of science, to address the intersecting questions of who (and what) constituted a Church father in this era, what was Josephus’ position alongside them. We examine measures like number of manuscripts, co-appearences in manuscripts, entries in library catalogues, « co-citation » data, annotations, and even some qualitative analysis to paint a broader and more nuanced picture of the early medieval Fathers. Josephus was probably not a « Father » to most, but the range and depth of his authority was surprising.
Medievalia & Humanistica, 2021
The early Middle Ages were a decisive period in the transmission of texts. Throughout the western... more The early Middle Ages were a decisive period in the transmission of texts. Throughout the western part of the former Roman Empire, scholars studied classical historians, poets, and grammarians, becoming-sometimes without even knowing it-an essential part of these authors' transmission and reception. Some of these fastidious scholars left notes in the margins of their manuscripts. Unfortunately, these notes have often been overlooked in classical and medieval reception studies. This chapter presents a joint research project at the Univer-sité du Québec à Montréal in Canada to study annotations in early medieval manuscripts of Flavius Josephus. The ultimate goal is to better grasp Josephus's ever-expanding influence and reputation throughout the course of the early Middle Ages, a topic barely explored to date. For this purpose, the marginal notes serve as useful tools that hint at early medieval readers' interests, abilities, and connections. We show here that Josephus was annotated more often than average (and even more than the Church fathers), betraying interests in exegesis and rhetoric, and that families of annotations may attest to hitherto unglimpsed textual communities.
Writing the Early Medieval West, 2018
(Pre-press)
Contemporary discussions of Charlemagne’s posthumous reputation, particularly with regard to his ... more Contemporary discussions of Charlemagne’s posthumous reputation, particularly with regard to his morality, make frequent reference to the Visio Wettini. This text records a vision experience by Wetti of Reichenau in 824, wherein Charlemagne is seen suffering for his lax behavior toward the end of his life. This scene is now considered a potent criticism of Charlemagne from the more puritanical age of Louis the Pious, one only ambiguously answered by Einhard, and is considered an enduring blot on the emperor’s legacy. But this blot may just be modern perception. This paper will explore the reception of the Charlemagne episode in the Visio Wettini from the 9th century to the 18th. In this investigation, it becomes clear that the Visio Wettini’s comments about Charlemagne (who is only identified there in oblique fashion) very quickly became dissociated from Charlemagne himself, such that the passage either came to be ignored or was read without understanding that it referred to a particular individual. It was not until Mabillon’s edition of 1677 that Charlemagne was restored to ignominy in the Visio Wettini, and even this restoration had limited impact. The Visio Wettini may colour our perception of Charlemagne, but for centuries Charlemagne’s memory was safe from its stinging criticism.
Some of the many medieval readers of Flavius Josephus's Antiquities annotated their manuscripts o... more Some of the many medieval readers of Flavius Josephus's Antiquities annotated their manuscripts of his works. This article investigates the origin of marginal notes found in early Latin copies of Josephus's Antiquities. The notes seem to predate the extant manuscripts and may stem from notes appended to an early copy of the Latin Antiquities, c.600. Certain interests — exegetical, typological, oratorical, and iconographic — apparent in the notes may even suggest that they originated at Cassiodorus's Vivarium. This centre produced the Latin translation of the Antiquities to which the notes are appended. These early notes, paired with some later Carolingian notes, offer a glimpse of Josephus's medieval reception.
The ancient Jewish historian Flavius Josephus is well known today, and was also very popular in l... more The ancient Jewish historian Flavius Josephus is well known today, and was also very popular in late antiquity and the Middle Ages. Medieval Christians read Josephus’s works in Latin translations made in the fourth to sixth centuries, and Josephus was recommended by none other than Jerome and Cassiodorus. There has, however, been relatively little study of the Latin text of Josephus, or of Josephus’s medieval reception and influence. Previous work has only hinted that the latter was vast, and that Josephus enjoyed a high reputation. This article carefully traces the reception of one Latin adaptation of Josephus’s Jewish War (the so-called “Hegesippus”) in the early Middle Ages. This heavily Christianized reworking of Josephus was read all over Europe, from Italy to England to Iberia. More importantly, because this text was invariably attributed to Josephus up to the ninth century, it becomes clear that some of Josephus’s considerable reputation in the Middle Ages was due— ironically — to a heavily Christianized perversion of his Jewish War.
The motto of Memorial University of Newfoundland, Provehito in Altum, remains immensely popular a... more The motto of Memorial University of Newfoundland, Provehito in Altum, remains immensely popular almost 90 years after it was selected. Like many mottos that are quotations, it invokes the weight of an ancient text to establish the authority of the institution. But the text invoked here is a very particular one that could be interpreted as highly sectarian. This article explores some of the possible reasons for the selection of Memorial’s motto, and discussion of some of the implications for our understanding of Memorial University College, the history of education in Newfoundland, and of the founding president, John Lewis Paton.
A Companion to Gregory the Great, 2013
Of all of Gregory's writings, there is perhaps no passage more striking than in the prologue to h... more Of all of Gregory's writings, there is perhaps no passage more striking than in the prologue to his Dialogues, where he paints a vivid, wistful picture of his present life as pope in a near poetic nautical metaphor:
Journal of Medieval Latin, 2010
Libri di scuola e pratiche didattiche, 2010
Difference and Identity in Francia and Medieval France, 2010
Uploads
Papers by Richard M Pollard
----
We have little idea who exactly belonged to the category of « Church father » in the early Middle Ages, or how this category was even defined in this period. As such, it remains impossible to confirm or refute claims of Patristic or quasi-Patristic status or authority for a particular author. Indeed, Heinz Schreckenberg claimed that Flavius Josephus (37-100 CE) almost attained the status of a Church father, even though we still have only a sketchy idea of Josephus’ reception. This preliminary article uses quantitative techniques, many borrowed from the history of science, to address the intersecting questions of who (and what) constituted a Church father in this era, what was Josephus’ position alongside them. We examine measures like number of manuscripts, co-appearences in manuscripts, entries in library catalogues, « co-citation » data, annotations, and even some qualitative analysis to paint a broader and more nuanced picture of the early medieval Fathers. Josephus was probably not a « Father » to most, but the range and depth of his authority was surprising.
----
We have little idea who exactly belonged to the category of « Church father » in the early Middle Ages, or how this category was even defined in this period. As such, it remains impossible to confirm or refute claims of Patristic or quasi-Patristic status or authority for a particular author. Indeed, Heinz Schreckenberg claimed that Flavius Josephus (37-100 CE) almost attained the status of a Church father, even though we still have only a sketchy idea of Josephus’ reception. This preliminary article uses quantitative techniques, many borrowed from the history of science, to address the intersecting questions of who (and what) constituted a Church father in this era, what was Josephus’ position alongside them. We examine measures like number of manuscripts, co-appearences in manuscripts, entries in library catalogues, « co-citation » data, annotations, and even some qualitative analysis to paint a broader and more nuanced picture of the early medieval Fathers. Josephus was probably not a « Father » to most, but the range and depth of his authority was surprising.