This study seeks to address three main questions: How do Panegyric VI, Lactantius, and Eusebius characterise and utilise their respective visions in their narratives? In what ways are they similar and/or different? Are some or all of the accounts related and, if so, how do they contribute to the Christian Vision legend? In Chapter One the vision narrative in Panegyric VI is deconstructed to show that the panegyrist describes the vision as taking place on Constantine’s return march from Massalia and that he is describing a dream-vision that took place at the sanctuary of Apollo at Grand. In Chapter Two it is argued that: Lactantius never resided in Gaul; he places the vision incorrectly in 312 because he did not know the details of the tradition and used Licinius’ dream as a template; and the Christian character of the vision is part of his interpretation. In Chapter Three Eusebius’ account is deconstructed to show that: the vision story derives from Constantine ca. 336; there is evidence that Constantine was reconstructing his past experiences; Eusebius inserted parallels with St. Paul to give the appearance of a conversion narrative; and Constantine’s actual story shows little influence of Christian socialisation. In each chapter the core elements of the narratives are highlighted: each describes a dream-vision, in which a deity appears to Constantine with a promise of victory and a token representation of that promise. In Chapter Four it is argued that Lactantius and Eusebius are describing the same symbol, which is a tau-cross with a loop; and that the panegyrist and Eusebius describe the same vision: they give the same chronology, but the panegyrist avoids referencing a solar halo because it was an inopportune omen of civil war. In conclusion, all three sources describe the same experience from different perspectives: the vision of Apollo was being constantly adapted to incorporate new historical developments. Appended also is an argument for redating Panegyric VI to August 309 on the basis of the narratives of the panegyrist and Lactantius, as well as archaeological investigations at Cologne (Constantine’s bridge over the Rhine) and Deutz (Castellum Divitia).

In this study of Dante and the religious orders and institutions of his time, I argue that the poet embeds histories of the religious orders into the Commedia. I demonstrate that Dante’s historical vision, as it pertains to the religious orders, is one of parallel decline, whereby the virtuous intentions of religious institutions are corrupted as time moves forward. By taking Dante’s own historical scheme, which is best articulated through the character of St. Benedict of Nursia in Paradiso 22, I propose a reading of the Commedia that excavates and traces the histories that Dante tells of the papacy, cardinals and bishops, monasticism, and the mendicant fraternal orders. The first chapter identifies the scriptural foundations of apostolic succession as they are articulated in the Commedia, and how the historical tribulations of the early church, especially the Donation of Constantine, is depicted by Dante through his early papal history. The second chapter posits that Dante’s “modern popes” are a useful category for understanding how the papal history of the Commedia intersects with issues of conversion and political theory. My third chapter focuses on Dante’s history of cardinals and bishops and has two goals: to explore the ways in which the twinning of the figures of Peter and Paul create the backbone of the Commedia’s program for apostolic renewal and to examine and historicize Dante’s critiques of the Decretalists. The next chapter, on the history of monasticism, focuses on Benedict of Nursia and the origins of Western monasticism as depicted in the Commedia, the history of monastic reform traced by Dante in his poem, and the ways in which he stages issues of compulsion on the backdrop of religious life. In my fifth and final chapter I turn to Dante’s histories of the mendicant fraternal orders (the Order of Friars Minor and the Order of Preachers) and the lives of their two founders (Francis and Dominic) as told in Paradiso. By tracing the histories of religious orders that are sutured into the fabric of his Commedia, this dissertation proposes a new way of examining Dante’s historical imagination and narrative craft.