Within the first book Orosius twice discusses in different terms how he intends to structure and organise the Historiae. The first instance is represented as a response to the neglect of time through the ignorance of other writers, and justifies the approach of
350
1.1.5-7, vol. 1, pp. 10-11: Sunt autem ab Adam primo homine usque ad Ninum <<magum>> ut dicunt regem, quando natus est Abraham, anni III CLXXXIIII...A Nino autem uel Abraham usque ad Caesarem Augustum – id est usque ad natiuitatem Christi quae fuit anno imperii Caesaris quadragesimo secundo, cum facta pace cum Parthis Iani portae clausae sunt et bella toto orbe cessarunt – colliguntur anni II XV.
351 For an extended discussion of the image of the temple of Janus in the Historiae, see 3.1.2, ‗The
his work not only as different but more comprehensive and therefore superior to these writers. The first example is explicitly organised around individual figures in history: Adam; Ninus and Abraham; Christ and Augustus. The exactitude and ordering of material is continued with the second instance in the organisation of the entire opus into a tripartite division:
Therefore, I intend to speak of the period from the founding of the world to the founding of the City; then up to the principate of Caesar and the birth of Christ, from which time the control of the world has remained under the power of the City, down even to our own time.352 (1.1.14, p. 7)
It has been noted that the division is not reflected as an even distribution within the text, but the apportioning of time itself is not equal so it is not necessary to expect the
division of the text to be proportional.353 Orosius‘s historiographical intention is inherently Romano-centric. From the beginning of the world as the starting point the text moves on to the founding of the city of Rome, then up to the beginning of the Roman empire and birth of Christ, down to the present time under which continues the universal dominance of Rome. Lozovsky has recognised the importance of Orosius‘s statement which serves to demonstrate
his view of the deep connection between historical events and the places where they occurred...he ties the story of the world and the story of man...to the story of the physical earth and the story of the human institution most important to Orosius – the Roman Empire.354
According to Lozovsky this passage expresses Orosius‘s ‗concept of history‘, that ‗the earth or the world is destined to be controlled by the City...and to accept
Christianity.‘355
Orosius‘s statement does more than that; it neatly encapsulates the historiographical approach in structuring the Historiae, where the division between the origin of the world and Orosius‘s own time is bisected by the beginning of the Roman empire and the Incarnation of Christ. In this organisation the dominance of Rome is immediately apparent, reinforced by the almost casual admission of the universal hegemony the empire is still able to operate.
352
1.1.14, vol. 1, p. 12: Dicturus igitur ab orbe condito usque ad Vrbem conditam, dehinc usque ad Caesaris prinipatum natiuitatemque Christi ex quo sub potestate Vrbis orbis mansit imperium, uel etiam usque ad dies nostros. In his choice of phrasing Orosius is punning on urbis and orbis. For a discussion of this pun see Lippold, (1976), vol. 1 p. 367. Also Varro, De lingua latina, 5.143.
353
Fear, (2010), p. 35, n. 19.
354 Lozovsky, (2000), p. 70. 355 Lozovsky, (2000), p. 70.
These two approaches, the first where history is organised around individual figures, and the second where time is divided in a tripartite structure, can be seen as distinct from the third and final approach Orosius records in the first book, which is articulated in geographical terms:
Insofar as I shall be able to recall them, I think it necessary to disclose the conflicts of the human race and the world, as it were, through its various parts, burning with evils, set afire with the torch of greed, viewing them as from a watchtower, so that first I shall describe the world itself which the human race inhabits, as it was divided by our ancestors into three parts and then established by regions and provinces, in order that when the locale of wars and the ravages of diseases are described, all interested may more easily obtain knowledge, not only of the events of their time, but also their location.356 (1.1.15-17, p. 7)
The approach of the text is explicitly geo-political in the intention to describe ‗the world itself which the human race inhabits, as it was divided by our ancestors into three parts and then established by regions and provinces‘. (1.1.16, p. 7) The ancient perspective of the world comprising Asia, Africa and Europe is readily accepted and replicated.357 This organisation of space saw the Mediterranean at the heart of the scheme, with the
subsequent hierarchy of regions, provinces, rulers, and the population. It has been noted that Orosius‘s methodology is not original except in the way it consistently views the world from east to west, recognising the Christian importance of this orientation.358 With this exception it must be observed how neglected the Christian significance of the east is in the Historiae. In favouring the division of the world based on the classical model Orosius deliberately neglects the tripartite division of the world found in Genesis where Noah‘s three sons are ordered by God to ‗fill the earth‘, a division which is used by Sulpicius Severus.359 The Holy Land and the geographical context for the life of Jesus is pointedly elided. This not only conforms to Orosius‘s version of Christian historiography which derives from secular rather than Scriptural models, but it also
356 1.1.15-17, vol. 1, p. 12: ...et ueluti per diuersas partes ardentem malis mundum face cupiditas
incensum e specula ostentaturus, necessarium reor ut primum ipsum terrarum orbem quem inhabitat humanum genus sicut est a maioribus trifarium distributum, deinde regionibus prouinciisque
determinatum, expediam; quo facilius, cum locales bellorum morborumque clades ostentabuntur, studiosi quique non solum rerum ac temporum sed etiam locorum scientiam consequantur.
357
For the division in ancient writers, see Herodotus, 2.16; Pliny, Naturalis historia, 3.1; Pomponius Mela, 1.1.
358 Shepard, (2001), p. 224.
359 Genesis, 9.1. See Olender, (1994), p. 10. Sulpicius Severus, Chronica, 1.4: ‗And the world was so
divided to the sons of Noah, that Shem occupied the East, Japhet the West, and Ham the intermediate parts.‘ sed filiis Noë ita diuisus orbis fuit, ut Sem intra Orinetem, Iaphet Occidentem, Cham mediis contineretur.
reorientates the narrative of history towards the west in the translation of empire from Babylon to Rome.
The passage quoted above which ends the Prologue to the text is fundamental to
understanding the geographical description of the world which immediately follows, an inclusion in the work that has been considered critically to be problematic. A. T. Fear notes that the purpose of the description of the world is to provide a geographical context for the work, but no further use is made of it and it does not describe all the areas later found in the Historiae: ‗It can be seen as establishing Orosius‘s universalist credentials but, beyond this, it is redundant.‘360
Lozovsky is less critical: ‗The image of the world that emerges from Orosius‘ geographical chapter does not directly reflect any of the historical themes proclaimed in his statement of intent...It provides a broad framework of reference for the following historical events, rather than time-specific topographical layout.‘361
Yves Janvier is much more positive:
En bref, en matière de géographie, Orose est un amateur, mais un amateur doué...On ne peut que le féliciter, d‘autre part, d‘avoir voulu faire de ce tableau du monde le support de l‘étude de l‘histoire universelle, et sans le fragmenter en digressions comme on l‘avait fait avant lui; d‘avoir compris que ―chronologie et géographie sont les deux foundements de toute historiographie authentique‖, qu‘on ne peut raisonnablement apprendre et comprendre le passé de l‘humanité qu‘en le rapportant aux lieux qui en ont été le théâtre ; en somme,d‘avoir su rappeler que l‘histoire a été vécue sur la Terre, non dans un milieu immatériel ou un espace absolu.362
The function of the geographical description of the world known to Orosius is explained by the link to time in the crucial final sentence of the Prologue: ‗all interested may more easily obtain knowledge, not only of the events of their time, but also their location.‘363 (1.1.17, p. 7) The geographical description allows the expansion of space and the enrichment of time in enabling multiple narratives to be developed simultaneously.364 By assimilating the passage of time to the extension of space it is possible to combat
360 Fear, (2010), p. 16 361 Lozovsky, (2000), p. 70.
362 Janvier, (1982), p. 262, quoting Lacroix, (1965), p. 52. For an assessment of the impact of Orosius as
an ancient geographer, see Merrills, (2005), pp. 35-6: ‗As a geographer, Orosius provided what was perhaps the single most influential delineation of the known world until the Origines of Isidore of Seville two centuries later‘. Merrills also recognises that ‗Orosius has habitually been included in a number of modern surveys of the history of geography and cartography, but chiefly as a moribund and barely competent regurgitator of classical truths.‘ Merrills, (2005), p. 36.
363 This can be argued in spite of Goffart: ‗The Christian universe of Orosius begins in timeless
geography‘. Goffart, (1988), p. 348. It seems likely that Goffart was referring not to the beginning of the Historiae but to Orosius‘s geographical description of the world known to him which was presented in temporal suspension. This has been noted by Lozovsky, (2000), p. 72.
what Peter Munz terms ‗the depressing experience of deprivation through time‘, that is, the unilateral narrative of time where one event replaces another.365 Through the
geographical description of the world Orosius achieves the layering of time in the stratification of the narrative even within his representation of time as linear and directed by progress.366 The broadening of time through the unfolding of space is characterised in the text by the language of temporal transition, link words such as
interea, ‗in the mean time‘; tunc, ‗at that time‘; eodem tempore, 'at the same time'; post hoc, 'after this'; sed dum haec [Darius] agit, ‗Now, while [Darius] was accomplishing
these things‘.367 In this way the extension of time is achieved through the expansion of space and it is therefore possible to represent multiple events happening at the same time in different places.