The mechanical miracle was always man-made, but manufacturing the marvellous always exceeded epistemological boundaries and thus attested to divine interference and presence. The delicate balance between these elements was not always easy to maintain, and the relation between technology and the gods came under critical examination, especially in the intense religious choice and competition of the Imperial period. The issue of religious forgery through technological means is central to Lucian’s Alexander and forms the focus of Chapter 7. The Alexander demonstrates the various ways that technical knowledge is integral to the act of miracle-making. turning the text, in spite of its satiric self, into a manual for these very same purposes. A comparison with Hippolytus’ Refutation of All Heresies not only attests to the broader use of technological miracles in ancient contexts, but also exemplifies how technology could be configured differently within a religion’s theological truths.

The chronological history of Eustathius of Epiphania (in Syria) covered events from Adam until AD 503. It consists of two parts, probably a part with sacred history from Creation until the Sack of Jerusalem and a second part with secular history from Aeneas until Eustathius’ own time. Eustathius is the only known Greek chronographer who preferred the chronology of the Hebrew Bible to that of the Septuagint. As a consequence, he defends a very early start of the Christian era in AM 4350. Eustathius relied on earlier histories and summarised these: a summary of the Jewish Antiquities of Flavius Josephus is preserved. Scholars have argued that Eustathius was a major source for a range of later authors (including John Malalas and Theophanes the Confessor), but we argue for a more cautious view.

Pyrrho is a further unknown chronographer from the sixth or seventh century, whose only remaining fragment discusses the chronology of Adam.

Chapter 8 explores how technologies can be used to imitate and challenge the gods. Lucian’s Icaromenippus is analysed first in terms of how the text reimagines divine and human realms as mechanically bridgeable, and then for the possible theomachic implications of the protagonist’s flight. Lucian’s Icaromenippus demonstrates that technologies are integral to navigating the junction between human and divine, but there are also hints that this can be manipulated in ways that pose threats to the existing divine order. The suggestion that Menippus’ actions mark him out as a pseudo or fake god provides a useful entry point for discussion of the issue of technology as a tool for theomachy more generally in the Greek cultural imagination including in figures like Salmoneus.

Two of the three references to a source called Irenaeus cannot be traced to the second-century theologian Irenaeus of Lyons. We argue that in this case John Malalas most likely added the name of Irenaeus, which he had found in Eusebius, to two unrelated pieces of information in order to generate the impression of great learning for his chronicle.