Abstract
Allegorizing History offers a cogent exploration of certain intersections between theology, history, and philosophy in the work of the Venerable Bede, and provides a nuanced response to the difficult question: how does the past relate to the present? Furry’s multifaceted reflections on this challenging issue treat the reader to a veritable feast of insights, not only from the Venerable Bede himself, but also from the works of scholars as diverse as St Augustine and Frank Ankersmit.
The first chapter sets forth a helpful overview of the state of Bede scholarship from the late nineteenth century to the present and explores how Bede’s interpreters sought to understand the exegetical methods employed by Bede in Historia Ecclesiastica. The second chapter compares Bede’s Historia Ecclesiastica and De Templo in an effort to understand the two works in relationship to each other. The result of this examination is Furry’s conclusion that ‘Bede does not, despite many opportunities, make the move to directly treat history as an allegory or figure even through the lens of Scripture’ (p. 63). The third chapter then compares Augustine’s and Bede’s respective interpretations of Genesis, arguing that while Augustine unquestionably synchronized biblical history with non-biblical history, Bede abstained from doing so. This chapter is the least developed aspect of the book. Many of Furry’s conclusions about Bede’s refusal to synchronize biblical and non-biblical history seem conjectural and tentative. This is a criticism that Furry comes close to acknowledging in the concluding paragraphs of the chapter (pp. 90–1). One is also left to wonder whether Bede expected his readers to pick up on his representational analogies without explicitly identifying when he was making such analogies. This is an interesting possibility, one Furry admits but then quickly dismisses as unlikely (p. 87). In the fourth chapter we are given a fascinating account of the relationship between anachronism and history, which demonstrates the chasm between Bede’s sense of the past and modern ones where past and present are kept separate from each other to avoid anachronism. Finally, the last chapter utilizes the work of Frank Ankersmit to argue compellingly that any history (Bede’s included) is inevitably representational.
Furry’s lucid style, helpful analogies, and impressive grasp of his multifarious series of interlocking subjects are sure to delight any careful reader who is interested in how the past relates to the present. A careful work such as this merits careful attention.