In “The Conversion of Christianity” from The World of Late Antiquity, the author, Peter Brown, traces the expansion of Christianity through chronological methodology  and biographical reasoning. Larry Hurtado performs a similar task using a distinct approach: he evaluates the manifestation of Christianity by assessing the adoption of codices, which were initially artifacts of the Greco-Roman world.

Peter Brown relies heavily on his authority as an expert in his field, often asserting his opinion as fact. He employs the use of a specific mode of persuasion– ethos– throughout his entire argument, which is fundamentally premised on his own personal laborious research. The fact he conducted his own research and features it as a primary source of evidence in his article starkly contrasts Hurtado’s more remote connection to his evidence, obtained predominantly from the Leuven Database of Ancient Books. Moreover, Hurtado’s style is in evident contradistinction to Brown’s, as he uses the logos appeal as his primary rhetorical appeal. He does not state his opinion to be fact, as Brown does. Rather, Hurtado is formulaic in that he states the position of other authorities, such as experts, scholars, and historians, and then expresses his personal stance, and offers his reasoning and evidence. Brown’s analysis is based essentially on diachrony and historical figures (such as Constantine), whereas Hurtado’s argument is crafted in a more synchronic fashion.

Moreover, Peter Brown has a very specific audience, as his piece is ostensibly responsive to someone else’s work. Consequently, he wastes little time delving into the complexities that someone without background knowledge would lack understanding of. He seems to assume the reader is relatively well-versed in the topic at hand, to the extent that the counterargument is mentioned but not thoroughly explained, and in some instances, foreign words are left without translation or reference. Hurtado, however, gives more background information and seems to cater to a broader audience– one of curious intellectuals who are not necessarily as knowledgeable in the field yet. This is evident through the various instances in which he outlines the beliefs others have about the matter prior to mentioning his own position.

Ultimately, both authors attempt to address how Christianity spread, and both provide an in-depth analysis of distinct aspects of this development, but they use divergent forms in doing so through their respective intended audiences, relationship to their evidence, and stylistic rhetorical choices.