Source Analysis

From its inception, Christendom’s relationship with Rome was at best ambivalent. Throughout the 1st century, Emperor Nero was viewed with distrust, with the Diocletianic Persecutions throughout the early 4th century substantiating such dubiety. Whilst Constantine’s issuance of the Edict of Milan (c.a. 313.A.D.) saw Christianity’s distrust of Rome recede, the relationship between Rome and Christian apocalypticism was inconsistent. Apart from the persistent anxiety that Nero would return as Antichrist, Roman emperor’s rarely featured in late antique eschatology. Negative discourse surrounding the Roman emperor abruptly changed in the late seventh century due to the work known as The Apocalypse of Pseudo-Methodius. Whilst certain mainstream aspects of Christian apocalyptic tradition are coherent throughout Pseudo-Methodius, such as the Son of Perdition and the Enclosed Nations narrative, the fascinating Last Roman Emperor is of particular significance to eschatological scholars. Pseudo-Methodius’s’ Last Roman Emperor promoted the quintessential Christian monarch, elevating kingship to a godly position intrinsically tethered to Christ’s second coming. Whilst the significance of the Last Roman Emperor cannot be disputed, Witakowski’s view that Pseudo-Methodius’s invented such a concept is fallacious. In the upcoming paper, I am going to argue that Pseudo-Methodius’s’ Last World Emperor was not a unique concept, rather an amalgamation of Jewish Messianism, Biblical scripture and Syriac literature. I will explain how the author used Jewish Messianism for the basic structure of his Last World Emperor, substantiating the concept through allegorically interpreting biblical scripture and localising it within the Syriac socio-political environment.

The enigmatic Apocalypse of Pseudo-Methodius, written pseudonymously by an author claiming to be bishop Methodius of Patara (m. c.a. 311.A.D.), was written in response to the Arab conquest of Jerusalem (ca. 367.A.D.) and establishment of the caliphate. Brock’s analysis of internal evidence dates the composition to circa 692.A.D. According to the Syriac literature, the descendants of Ishmael would rule for ten ‘weeks of years,’ or seventy years. Assuming the period began with the Hejira (622.A.D.), the last weeks of years’ would span the period 685-692.A.D. Abd al-Malik’s economic reforms throughout the period substantiate Brock’s approximation. Such economic reforms increased taxes for non-Christians, incentivising them to convert to Islam. Pseudo-Methodius saw this as the ‘falling away’ of Christendom foretold by Paul in his letter to the Thessalonians (2:Thessalonians:2:3). Reinink, recognising the pre-eminence of typology throughout the Syriac Apocalypse, concentrates Brock’s approximation to 691.A.D; the year the Dome of the Rock was constructed on the Temple Mount. The construction of the Dome of the Rock was symbolic, demoting Christianity to subordinate status and exemplifying enduring Muslim rule. Whilst Abd al-Malik is not explicitly mentioned in the Syriac literature, theologians should not pay particular heed to such an omission let alone allow it to curtail dating hypotheses. Contemporary figures were ignored because the author was pretending to record a prophecy that had been in circulation for centuries. This common theological trope, known as vaticinium ex eventu, originated in the Babylonian ‘Marduk Prophecy’ and was popularised by Daniels ‘prediction’ of Alexandrian conquests (Daniel:8:5) and persecution of Antiochus IV (Daniel:11:21-45).

The popularity of Pseudo-Methodius is best exhibited by analysing its influence on Byzantine eschatological tradition. Almost all subsequent Greek apocalyptic literature used themes and motifs found in Pseudo-Methodius, with extracts even finding their way into the Russian Primary Chronicle. In the West, the Syriac Apocalypse had enduring influence, developing the concept of ‘othering’ and allowing nations to fathom foreign enemies. When the Mongols besieged Baghdad (1251.A.D.), they were labelled as descents of Gog and Magog. Furthermore, the Apocalypse of Pseudo-Methodius was printed and distributed when the Turks bombarded Vienne (1682.A.D.). Despite its far-reaching influence, Pseudo-Methodius cites an astonishingly small number of sources to formulate the career of the Last World Emperor. The predominant source is the Bible, with Pseudo-Methodius selecting a curious choice of passages to postulate his end-times narrative. Despite its paramount position in late antique eschatology, Pseudo-Methodius completely ignores the Book of Revelation, presumably as it was incongruous with his positive perception of the Roman Empire. Furthermore, the author all but ignores the Book of Ezekiel, which holds the most detailed description of Gog and Magog. Instead, the author utilises 2:Thessalonians:2:1-12 to construct his eschatological chronology, chronicling the Roman Empire as ‘he who now letteth’ (2:Thessalonians:2:7) preventing the reign of Antichrist. Most perplexing is the use of Psalm:68:31, ‘Ethiopia shall soon stretch out her hands unto God,’ to prophesise the abdication of the Last Roman Emperor.

Structurally speaking, there are distinct similarities between the Jewish Messianic model and Pseudo-Methodius’s’ end-times sequence. Pseudo-Methodius divides world chronology into three distinct periods: The Last Roman Emperor defeating the Arabs, his subsequent prosperous reign, and his abdication at Jerusalem. The Jewish tripartite world-age scheme follows a similar trajectory: Current world, Messianic rule, and the Kingdom of Heaven. Furthermore, one can note similarities between the arrival of the Last Roman Emperor and the arrival of the Jewish Messiah. Pseudo-Methodius positions the arrival of the Last World Emperor between the jurisdiction of non-Christian others and the Second Coming of Christ. During the period of earthly rule, the Last Roman Emperor and his followers possess god-like virtue, however world-history and earthly institutions such as Jerusalem and Palestine continue to exist. The earthly reign of the Last Roman Emperor is differentiated from the subsequent metaphysical age, when such temporal institutions will cease as the Kingdom of Heaven is established. Whilst the notion of an intermediary period between the last days and the second coming is often associated with chiliasm, it had its roots in Jewish scripture. In both rabbinic and apocalyptic literature, Jewish literature discusses a period of Israel’s prosperity between the Messianic present and Christ’s Second Coming. The Jewish concept of Zwischenreich, an intermediary period between earthy reign and second coming, is established in both biblical and patristic literature. The notion that the Messiah would oversee a prosperous earthly reign was appropriated by chiliasts. They interpreted Genesis’ creation narrative in light of Psalm:90:4 and Peter:3:8, professing that Jesus would reign for 1000 years. The Zwischenreich concept has led historians, such as Garstad, to erroneously classify Pseudo-Methodius as overtly chiliast. Whilst Pseudo-Methodius accepts Septimana Mundi and the Daniellic world ages scheme, he predominantly uses the typical Syriac method of typological and symbolic exegesis to explain and describe the stages of the world. For Pseudo-Methodius, biblical history emulated in the present. Just as Gideon, son of Joash, defeated Midianites and Amalekites (Judges:6), his typological successor, the Last Roman Emperor, would defeat them again.

There are characteristic resemblances between Pseudo-Methodius’s’ Last Roman Emperor and the Jewish Messiah. Both have no name, no distinguishable attributes, defined solely by prophetic intervention and ‘just’ jurisdiction. Just as Pseudo-Methodius describes the Last Roman Emperor as a ‘Redeemer’, Jewish literature uses the word goel (Redeemer) to detail the Messiah’s Second Coming. The Hebrew term ge’uloh was frequently used by rabbis and appeared on the coinage of Bar Kokhba as technical phraseology for the Messianic liberation of the Holy Land from Roman jurisdiction. Pseudo-Methodius’s’ use of the term Redeemer to typify the emancipation of Christendom from Arab rule is thus entirely appropriate. Such tradition also explains the role of the Last Roman Emperors ‘sons’ in aiding military conquests. The word ‘son’ should not be taken literally, with the Syriac translation meaning ‘councilman’ or ‘companion’. Pseudo-Methodius is likely referencing 4:Ezra:7:28, 4:Ezra:8:52 and Enoch:45:3. The passages in the Book of Ezra detail the Messiah’s companions, with the passage in the Book of Enoch discussing the Messiah surrounded by members of the Elect.

The timing and circumstances of the Last Emperor’s arrival also bare distinct similarities with the arrival of the Jewish Messiah. Pseudo-Methodius describes the sudden arrival of the Last Roman Emperor when Christianity is at its weakest and Arab dominance is inevitable. Similarly, the sudden appearance of the Messiah is noted, albeit infrequently, in both rabbinic and apocalyptic Jewish literature. The Messiah would appear when Israel’s enemies threaten the very survival of the Jewish people. Like Pseudo-Methodius, the Jewish Messiah is a divine presence who arrives in Israel’s time of need and ridding non-religious others. The Messianic model also goes some way in explaining the Last Roman Emperor’s curious ten-and-a-half-year settlement in Jerusalem. Residence in Jerusalem appears perplexing, after all, Constantinople was the centre of Christendom and a ‘complex ideology had been built around that capital’. Instead of following Byzantine tradition, Pseudo-Methodius takes inspiration from Late Jewish tradition; specifically, the Jewish Messiah who’s activities were naturally centred around Mount Zion. Such Jewish tradition also explains why Pseudo-Methodius places particular emphasis on the emancipation of Palestine from Arab yoke. The author even refers to Palestine as the Promised Land, a term of particular religious significance throughout Jewish scripture.

Pseudo-Methodius allegorically interprets biblical scripture to substantiate the role of the Last Roman Emperor in the end-times sequence. Most striking is the authors exegesis Psalm:68:31: ‘Ethiopia shall soon stretch out her hands unto God.’ This biblical passage was not customary in eschatological repertoire, rather a prophecy regarding the conversion of Gentiles. Furthermore, one assumes the prophecy was fulfilled by the conversion of the Ethiopian queen's eunuch by the Apostle Philip (Acts:8:26-40). What is most perplexing is how Pseudo-Methodius combined translational techniques to make the passage congruous with his Last Emperor narrative. The Syriac Bible’s (Peshitta) translation of Psalm:68:31 reads: Kś taślem (') dh l- (') ăl h (14,5), the expression ’taślem (') dh’ translating as ‘yield’. This is evidently incongruous with Pseudo-Methodius’s’ career of the Last Emperor. On the other hand, the Hebrew Masoretic text reads: Kś trş ydh (y) w l- (') elhm’, the verb ‘trş’ translating as ‘chase away’ or ‘banish’. This, again, is incongruous with the role of the Last Emperor in the end-times sequence. It appears Pseudo-Methodius mixed translational techniques to acquire a new meaning for the passage. He used the Hebrew Masoretic verb ‘ydh’ (hand) as a metaphor for power, and adapts the verb ‘trş’ (banish) to ‘trm (raise). As a result, the passage acquired the meaning: 'Ethiopia shall surrender (yield her power) to God.' To make this prophecy compatible with historiography, Pseudo-Methodius invented a far-fetched Ethio-Hellenic heritage for the Last Roman Emperor, combining Roman Lineage with Ethiopian descendance.

Pseudo-Methodius, understanding the socio-political environment and religious history of the Syriac Orthodox Church, utilised Ethiopia’s position as an ‘earthly protector’ to substantiate his last-days narrative. The Syriac Orthodox Church followed the Monophysite teachings of Christianity. Monophysitism taught that Jesus had only one ‘divine’ nature, differing from the view established at the Council of Chalcedon (415.A.D.) that Jesus had both ‘divine’ and ‘human nature’ Consequently, Monophysitism was seen as heretical by the Byzantine Orthodoxy. In the final centuries of Byzantine control in Syria, persecutions of the heretical Monophysite’s increased. Such persecutions, notably Emperor Maurice’s slaughter of 400 monks outside Odessa, left traumatic memory amongst Syrians. During these persecutions, it was the fellow Monophysite Kingdom of Ethiopia that provided refuge from Syrian Monks. Ethiopia also intervened in Nadjran and South Arabia in 520.A.D., when Himyarite king, Yusuf As'ar Dhu Nuwas, converted to Judaism and subsequently persecuted Najranite Christians.

This leads us to believe that the author was himself a Monophysite Christian, emphasising the importance of Ethiopia because of personal denominational beliefs. The preface of the Syriac Apocalypse states Methodius received a vision on the ‘mountain of Senegar’; Mount Singara (Sinjar) is situated northwest of Mosul and Reinink hypothesizes that the true author of Pseudo-Methodius most likely came from this region. Singara was a cultural bastion of Monophysite Christianity in Mesopotamia, second only in religious importance to Ethiopia. It is therefore entirely plausible that the author recognized Ethiopia’s religious importance and thus bestowed an integral role during the end-times. Garstad disagrees with this hypothesis, arguing the authors belief in the de-establishment of Islam through the actions of a Roman emperor suggests he belonged to the Melchite Church, which adhered to the Chalcedonian Creed. One could theorise that Pseudo-Methodius was purposely enigmatic regarding his personal religious ideology, calling all Christians to battle Islam regardless of denominational factionalism.

Pseudo-Methodius uses three additional Biblical passages to supplement the career of the Last Roman Emperor:

1). 'Eat and drink, men will take wives and wives will be given to them'

(Matthew 24:38 and Luke 17:27)

The phrase is a fairly literal translation of the line that was spoken by Jesus in response to the disciples’ question: 'what will be the sign of your coming and the close of the age?' Surprisingly, Pseudo-Methodius positions the passage earlier in the end-times narrative, using it to describe the Last Emperor’s prosperous reign.

2). ‘The Lord was aroused...like a man who shakes off his wine’

(Psalm:78:65)

Pseudo-Methodius uses this passage to describe the future of the Last Roman Emperor. He excludes the words ‘the Lord’, changing the passage into a prophecy involving the Last King’s Ishmaelite adversaries. Consequently, the passage reads: ‘He {King of Greeks] will be aroused against them [the Arabs] like a man who shakes off his wine.’

3). ‘When he shall have brought to nought all principality, and power, and virtue.’

(1:Corinthians:15:24)

Whilst less overt, Pseudo-Methodius clearly draws upon 1:Corinthians:15:24 to compose the passage: ‘Thereupon every leader and all authority and all powers will be brought to nought.’ Pseudo-Methodius alters the verb from ‘active’ to ‘passive’ so it refers to the Last Roman Emperor. Originally, the passage detailed how Jesus would ‘deliver the kingdom to God the Father after destroying every rule, authority and power' (Corinthians:15:24). Pseudo-Methodius, however, interprets the passage considering Saint Paul’s warning to the Thessalonians (2:Thessalonians:2:7). St Paul advised his contemporaries not to worry about the end-times, reassuring them that there was a figure stopping the ‘Man of Lawlessness‘ from coming to fruition. Such restraint would have to be removed before the last days could commence. Pseudo-Methodius propagated that the ‘restraint’ was the Roman Empire, a view many late antique eschatologists held.

Pseudo Methodius drew upon Syriac literature to formulate the Last Emperor’s distinct characteristics. Pseudo-Methodius’s’ depiction of Alexander the Great as the typological precursor of the Last Emperor, suggests he drew inspiration from the Glorious Deeds of Alexander (Alexander Legend). This early 7th-century literature provides a fictitious description of Alexander’s rule, utilising Ezekiel 48:31 to detail the chastisement of Gog and Magog behind the Gates of the North. Pseudo-Methodius develops the eschatological structure of Alexander Legend, using Pseudo-Ephraem’s Homily on the End to discuss the temporary rule of the Roman Empire after the defeat of Gog and Magog. Whilst Alexander Legend and Homily of the End set out the eschatological sequence of events in which the Last Emperor operates, neither mention a legendary emperor as an agent for change. It is plausible that Pseudo-Methodius was inspired by Emperor Jovian, as described in the Syriac Julian Romance. The Julian Romance tells the story of the anti-Christian emperor Julian, who is subsequently killed by Emperor Jovian. Emperor Jovian is portrayed as the quintessential Christian leader, saving the Christian people from pagan despotism; much like how Pseudo-Methodius’s’ Last Roman Emperor emancipates the Christians from Arab yoke.

How can one explain such an idiosyncratic concoction of Jewish Messianic scripture, allegorised Biblical passages, and Syriac scripture? More importantly, how can one explain the resurgence of rabbinic teaching in seventh-century Christian apocalypticism? Whilst my analysis has demonstrated the apocalyptic mutuality of Christianity and Judaism, any explanation as to why Pseudo-Methodius fused Jewish scripture, Biblical terminology and Syriac literature would be speculative. There are two logical possibilities. The first is that Pseudo-Methodius imparted Jewish Messianism into Christian eschatological structure. If this were the case, the author could not have procured his Messianic structure from solely the Bible, for he uses elements of Jewish tradition that simply aren’t noted in Biblical canon. The author therefore must have had access to extra-canonical Messianic tradition, preserved by Jewish or Christian communities in Mesopotamia into early Arab times. The second explanation is that Pseudo-Methodius lived in a Monophysite region with established ties to Messianic Judaism. Regardless, Pseudo-Methodius’s’ Last Roman Emperor demonstrates the mutuality between late-Jewish tradition and Christian apocalypticism and proves that Jewish Messianism remained relevant in Mesopotamia throughout the seventh-century.