Reading John of Ephesus via Procopius of Caesarea?: Revisiting the Comparison of Their Accounts of the Justinianic Plague
The purpose of this article is to revisit the comparison between the accounts of the Justinianic plague of 541–750 CE, the first recorded pandemic of bubonic plague, by John of Ephesus and Procopius of Caesarea, as done by the scholar of Byzantine history, Anthony Kaldellis, in a 2007 publication. I...
| Nebentitel: | Magic and Mischief: Texts and Practices in Philosophy, Theology, and the Sciences |
|---|---|
| 1. VerfasserIn: | |
| Medienart: | Elektronisch Aufsatz |
| Sprache: | Englisch |
| Verfügbarkeit prüfen: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Lade...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Veröffentlicht: |
Brill
2023
|
| In: |
Religion & theology
Jahr: 2023, Band: 30, Heft: 3/4, Seiten: 359-379 |
| weitere Schlagwörter: | B
John of Ephesus
B Justinianic plague B Discourse B bubonic plague B ancient pandemics B Anthony Kaldellis B Procopius of Caesarea |
| Online Zugang: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Zusammenfassung: | The purpose of this article is to revisit the comparison between the accounts of the Justinianic plague of 541–750 CE, the first recorded pandemic of bubonic plague, by John of Ephesus and Procopius of Caesarea, as done by the scholar of Byzantine history, Anthony Kaldellis, in a 2007 publication. In the article, I critique some of Kaldellis’s main points of comparison, and then by approaching plague as a discourse (in the Foucaultian sense), I attempt to provide a more nuanced reading and comparison of the individual accounts, and of ancient plague discourse more generally. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1574-3012 |
| Enthält: | Enthalten in: Religion & theology
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1163/15743012-bja10062 |