Since the mid-twentieth century, especially through the influence of George Eldon Ladd, the term “historic premillennialism” has been used to describe a form of early Christian eschatology distinct from later forms of premillennialism, particularly “dispensational premillennialism.” In the last seventy-five years, however, scholarly engagement with pre-Nicene eschatology has acknowledged a much greater diversity of views within the basic chiliastic framework, some elements of which correspond to aspects of allegedly novel, modern premillennialism. Nevertheless, the term “historic premillennialism” is often employed to suggest a specific form of premillennialism was the dominant view of the early church. The actual historical situation is much more complicated. Through a survey of the primary sources, this paper argues that the chiliasm of the first few centuries was quite diverse, with at least five distinct positions: Incarnational Chiliasm of Irenaeus, Spiritual Chiliasm of Tertullian, New Creation Chiliasm of Barnabas, Israel-centric Chiliasm of Nepos, and Carnal Chiliasm of Cerinthus. Because elements of all forms of “modern” premillennialism can be found along the spectrum of these various historical traditions, the term “historic premillennialism” should probably be retired in favor of a more nuanced treatment of the historical evidence. In short, no contemporary form of premillennialism reflects the historic view of the early church, because no such singular view existed.