Whose Time? Which Rationality?

Reflections on Empire, 1 Peter, and the “Common Era”

Authors

  • Wei-Hsien Wan University of Exeter

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.1558/post.v7i3.28300

Keywords:

1 Peter, imperial cults, decolonial studies, anthropology of time, politics of time

Abstract

The Roman imperial cults and the early Christians articulated different constructions of time, each offering its version of history built around a particular axis. The Augustan era inaugurated a transformation that reconfigured the imagination of time around the emperor and the ordo of statecraft. As a forerunner of later developments in the Christian tradition, the First Letter of Peter, on the other hand, anchored its vision of time in the life, death and resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth. Using this contrast as a launching point for reflection on social constructions of time, this paper examines the notion of a “Common Era” that has, in recent decades, gained widespread use in the academic practice. Despite its appearance as a more inclusive way of indicating “shared time”, I argue that it functions, rather insidiously, to mask as universal a construct that is in fact culturally-specific and localized in the European Christian experience.

Author Biography

Wei-Hsien Wan, University of Exeter

Wei Hsien Wan is a third-year PhD student in the Department of Theology and Religion at the University of Exeter. His thesis, supervised by David Horrell, examines ideological conflict between Roman imperialism and 1 Peter.

References

Adam, Barbara. 1990. Time and Social Theory. Oxford: Polity Press.

Appadurai, Arjun. 1981. “The Past as a Scarce Resource.” Man 16(2): 201–219. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2801395

Banazak, Gregory Allen and Luis Reyes Ceja. 2010. “The Challenge and Promise of Decolonial Thought to Biblical Interpretation,” Postscripts: The Journal of Sacred Texts and Contemporary Worlds 4(1): 113–127. http://dx.doi.org/10.1558/post.v4i1.113

Bloch, Maurice. 1977. “The Past and the Present in the Present.” Man 12(2): 278–292. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2800799

Boring, M. E. 2007. “Narrative Dynamics in 1 Peter: The Function of Narrative World.” In Reading First Peter with New Eyes: Methodological Reassessments of the Letter of First Peter, edited by Robert L. Webb and Betsy Bauman-Martin, 7–40. New York: T&T Clark.

Cargill, Robert R. 2009. “Why Christians Should Adopt the BCE/CE Dating System.” The Bible and Interpretation. http://www.bibleinterp.com/opeds/why_3530.shtml.

Dussel, Enrique. 1993. “Eurocentrism and Modernity (Introduction to the Frankfurt Lectures),” Boundary 2 20(3): 65–76. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/303341

Elliott, J. H. 2000. 1 Peter: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary. New York: Doubleday.

Fabian, Johannes. 2002. Time and the Other: How Anthropology Makes Its Object. New York: Columbia University Press.

Feeney, Denis. 2007. Caesar’s Calendar: Ancient Time and the Beginnings of History. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Friesen, Steven J. 2001. Imperial Cults and the Apocalypse of John: Reading Revelation in the Ruins. New York: Oxford University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/0195131533.001.0001

———. 1993. Twice Neokoros: Ephesus, Asia, and the Cult of the Flavian Imperial Family. Leiden: Brill. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/9789004283442

Foucault, Michel. 1979. Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. Translated by Alan Sheridan. Harmondsworth: Penguin.

Geertz, Clifford. 1973. “Person, Time and Conduct in Bali.” In The Interpretation of Cultures: Selected Essays, 360–411. New York, NY: Basic Books.

Goppelt, Leonhard. 1993 A Commentary on I Peter. Edited by Ferdinand Hahn, Translated by John E. Alsup. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans.

Horrell, David G. 2008. 1 Peter. Edinburgh: T&T Clark.

———. 1998. The Epistles of Peter and Jude. Peterborough: Epworth

Leach, Edmund. 1961. “Two Essays Concerning the Symbolic Representation of Time.” In Rethinking Anthropology, 124–136. London: Athlone.

Michaels, J. Ramsey. 1988. 1 Peter. Dallas, TX: Word

Mignolo, W. D. 2009. “Epistemic Disobedience, Independent Thought and Decolonial Freedom.” Theory, Culture and Society 26(7–8): 159–181. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0263276409349275

Mitchell, Stephen. 1993. Anatolia: Land, Men, and Gods in Asia Minor, Volume I: The Celts and the Impact of Roman Rule. Oxford: Clarendon.

Munn, Nancy D. 1992. “The Cultural Anthropology of Time: A Critical Essay.” Annual Review of Anthropology 21: 93–123. http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.an.21.100192.000521

Ozouf, Mona. 1989. “Revolutionary Calendar.” In A Critical Dictionary of the French Revolution, edited by François Furet and Mona Ozouf, 538–547. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Price, Simon. 1984. Rituals and Power: The Roman Imperial Cult in Asia Minor. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Quijano, Aníbal. 2007. “Coloniality and Modernity/Rationality,” Cultural Studies 21(2–3): 168–178. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09502380601164353

Rubin, Benjamin B. 2008. “(Re)presenting Empire: The Roman Imperial Cult in Asia Minor, 31 BC–AD 68.” Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Michigan.

Shaw, Pamela-Jane. 2003. Discrepancies in Olympiad Dating and Chronological Problems of Archaic Peloponnesian History. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag

Sherk, Robert K. 1969. Roman Documents from the Greek East: Senatus Consulta and Epistulae to the Age of Augustus. Baltimore, MD: John Hopkins

Published

2016-01-20

How to Cite

Wan, W.-H. (2016). Whose Time? Which Rationality? Reflections on Empire, 1 Peter, and the “Common Era”. Postscripts: The Journal of Sacred Texts, Cultural Histories, and Contemporary Contexts, 7(3), 279–294. https://doi.org/10.1558/post.v7i3.28300

Issue

Section

Special Issue Articles