The Early Church recognized that Jesus identified the Great Tribulation as the Jewish Diaspora.
It's generally known that the Early Church interpreted the Olivet Discourse as focusing on the desolation of the temple in 70 AD, and on the Jewish Dispersion to follow. The following link, written by a pretribulationist in Tacoma, WA, is, I think, a pathetic attempt to circumvent this reality by applying a false standard of proof.
He seeks to show that the Early Church Fathers rarely represented an historical interpretation of Dan 9 and Luke 21 by simply proving they were not Preterists in the full sense of that term. Simply by proving the Church Fathers generally held to a future belief in the coming of Antichrist and in the coming of Christ he thought he disproved any substantial connection between the Abomination of Desolation with the 66-70 AD war, and any connection between the Great Tribulation and the Jewish Dispersion.
But if you look carefully at how he presents the teachings of Tertullian, you will see quite a different picture.
"Tertullian says of Jesus’ response to His disciples that He was referring to the order of Jewish events that would occur until the destruction of Jerusalem, but then the Gentiles would tread down Jerusalem until the Gentile period should end."
https://www.pre-trib.org/pretribfiles/pdfs/House-TheUnderstandingofth.pdf
This link shows the confusion over precisely how the Church Fathers viewed Dan 9 and the Olivet Discourse, and the associated terms. He focuses on what he perceived to be "mass confusion" on the subject. But I don't personally see the problem as anything more than a general consensus that the Olivet Discourse was an historical fulfillment to be best interpreted at the time of the fulfillment. Adding future elements to the prophecy does not create confusion, but is precisely what the Olivet Discourse was meant to do, namely to compare the future Coming of Christ with judgments against the Jews to precede that time.
Abomination of Desolation & the Early Church Fathers
The Church Fathers did address the Abomination of Desolation, as well as the Great Tribulation, both referenced in the Olivet Discourse. But I would have to look up previous studies I've done on the subject. If you don't know what they believed, I will try to spend the time to recover these sources? In the meantime, if you have evidence to the contrary please present it! I'm open to all info on the subject.
The only problem I see is as I showed you above. Authors with an agenda tend to disqualify such generalizations by creating a false comparison. We are not comparing the view of the Church Fathers with the entirety of Preterist theology! We are not disqualifying the Church Fathers as historical interpreters by proving that the Church Fathers were futurists! They obviously were both!
Rather, we are narrowing our search down to how the Church Fathers generally interpreted the Abomination of Desolation, the Great Tribulation, and the Olivet Discourse, particularly Luke 21. Did they see this as an historical fulfillment, leading up to a future Antichrist and to a future Coming of Christ? I believe so. Please provided evidence to the contrary. If you need my own studies on the subject, just ask. But the abundance of positions disinterested in this make it a little difficult to find quickly.
It might help you to look up the Bible Hub commentaries on Luke 21.23? They seem to suggest that this passage on the "Great Tribulation" is commonly associated with the Jewish tribulation that began in 70 AD and continues throughout the age.
Luke 21:23 Commentaries: "Woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days; for there will be great distress upon the land and wrath to this people;
Yes, in my documents I do have Church Fathers quotes on the AoD. But it is lengthy and somewhat difficult to read. There is a general understanding of the historicity of Dan 9 and of the Olivet Discourse. But there is also some confusion of the use of the associated terms, Abomination of Desolation and Great Tribulation, whether to be applied as historical or future.
My point is not that some of these terms were applied, by the Church Fathers, as futurist. Rather, my point is that generally, the Olivet Discourse was interpreted in an historical Jewish context, referring to the 70 AD destruction of Jerusalem and to the ensuing Jewish Diaspora.