Freethought & Rationalism Archive

stephan huller · 06-11-2013, 12:40 PM

The following quotation is from the Latin of Cassiodorus as modified by Clifton Black:

Quote:

Mark, Peter's follower [sectator] while Peter was preaching [praedicante] publicly the Gospel at Rome in the presence of certain of Caesar's equestrians [equitubus, i.e., members of the equestrian order] and was putting forward many testimonies concerning Christ, being requested [petitus] by them that they might be able to commit to memory the things that were being spoken, wrote from the things which were spoken by Peter the Gospel which is called according to Mark. [Clement Hypotyposeis from Adumbrations in 1 Peter 5:13 from C Clifton Black].

Here is a perfect example of why Jeffrey's departure isn't an entirely bad thing (even though I hope beyond measure he comes back). If you were to start a thread like this, his mind would explode. 'Imperial conspiracy theories are ridiculous!' or some such hobby horse of his. But here is explicit evidence - perhaps our best and earliest evidence about the creation of the gospel of Mark - which makes that 'preposterous claim' explicit. Is there any other way to interpret this evidence?

I welcome any counter argument.

stephan huller · 06-11-2013, 12:47 PM

Marcus, Petri sectator, praedicante Petro evangelium palam Romae coram quibusdam Caesareanis equitibus et multa Christi testimonia proferente, petitus ab eis, ut possent quae dicebantur memoriae commendare, scripsit ex his quae a Petro dicta sunt evangelium quod secundum Marcum vocitatur (Adumbrationes in epistolas canonicas in 1 Peter 5:13)

Mark, the follower of Peter, while Peter was publically preaching the Gospel at Rome in the presence of some of Caesar’s knights and uttering many testimonies of Christ, on their asking him to let them have a written record of the things which had been said, wrote the Gospel which is called the Gospel of Mark, form the things said by Peter… (Bernard Orchard in The Order of the Synoptics (or via: amazon.co.uk), pg 131)

stephan huller · 06-11-2013, 12:55 PM

The best counter-argument is von Harnack's claim that the reference to Caesar's equestrians is an addition from the Acts of Peter because it doesn't appear in Eusebius's summary:

Quote:

Αὖθις δ’ ἐν τοῖς αὐτοῖς ὁ Κλήμης βιβλίοις περὶ τῆς τάξεως τῶν εὐαγγελίων παράδοσιν τῶν ἀνέκαθεν πρεσβυτέρων τέθειται, τοῦτον ἔχουσαν τὸν τρόπον· προγεγράφθαι ἔλεγεν τῶν εὐαγγελίων τὰ περιέχοντα τὰς γενεαλογίας, τὸ δὲ κατὰ Μάρκον ταύτην ἐσχηκέναι τὴν οἰκονομίαν. τοῦ πέτρου δημοσίᾳ ἐν Ρώμῃ κηρύξαντος τὸν λόγον καὶ πνεύματι τὸ εὐαγγέλιον ἐξειπόντος, τοὺς παρόντας, πολλοὺς ὄντας, παρακαλέσαι τὸν Μάρκον, ὡς ἂν ἀκολουθήσαντα αὐτῷ πόρρωθεν καὶ μεμνημένον τῶν λεχθέντων, ἀναγράψαι τὰ εἰρημένα· ποιήσαντα δέ, τὸ εὐαγγέλιον μεταδοῦναι τοῖς δεομένοις αὐτοῦ·ὅπερ ἐπιγνόντα τὸν Πέτρον προτρεπτικῶς μήτε κωλῦσαι μήτε προτρέψασθαι. τὸν μέντοι Ἰωάννην ἔσχατον, συνιδόντα ὅτι τὰ σωματικὰ ἐν τοῖς εὐαγγελίοις δεδήλωται, προτραπέντα ὑπο τῶν γνωρίμων, πνεύματι θεοφορηθέντα πνευματικὸν ποιῆσαι ευ0αγγέλιον. τοσαῦτα ὁ Κλήμης. (in Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 6.14.5-7)

Again, in the same books, Clement gives the tradition of the earliest presbyters, as to the order of the Gospels, in the following manner: The Gospels containing the genealogies, he says, were written first. The Gospel according to Mark had this occasion. As Peter had preached the Word publicly at Rome, and declared the Gospel by the Spirit, many who were present requested that Mark, who had followed him for a long time and remembered his sayings, should write them out. And having composed the Gospel he gave it to those who had requested it. When Peter learned of this, he neither directly forbade nor encouraged it. But, last of all, John, perceiving that the external facts had been made plain in the Gospel, being urged by his friends, and inspired by the Spirit, composed a spiritual Gospel. This is the account of Clement. (Arthur Cushman McGiffert)

And again in the same books [the Outlines], Clement states a tradition of the very earliest presbyters about the order of the gospels; and it has this form. He used to say that the first written of the gospels were those having the geneologies, and that the Gospel of Mark had this formation. While Peter was publically preaching the Word in Rome and proclaiming the gospel by the the [sic] Spirit, the audience, which was numerous, begged Mark, as one who had followed him for a long time and remembered what had been said, to write down the things he had said. And he did so, handing over the Gospel to those who had asked for it. And when Peter got to know about it, he exerted no pressure either to forbid it or to promote it… (Bernard Orchard in The Order of the Synoptics, pg 166)

Toto · 06-11-2013, 12:56 PM

Why do you think this evidence for an imperial theory?

It claims that Peter preached to the Roman legions, which sounds dubious to start out with, and then they asked Mark to write it all down. . .

But this story doesn't show up until the time of Flavius Magnus Aurelius Cassiodorus Senator (c. 485 – c. 585) " a Roman statesman and writer, serving in the administration of Theoderic the Great, king of the Ostrogoths."

stephan huller · 06-11-2013, 12:58 PM

Well they ask for the manufacture of the gospel of Mark and there are 'Latinisms' in the existing text. It reinforces the idea that the material was made by or for an elite group of people in the Imperial capitol.

stephan huller · 06-11-2013, 12:58 PM

Quote:

But this story doesn't show up until the time of Flavius Magnus Aurelius Cassiodorus Senator (c. 485 – c. 585) " a Roman statesman and writer, serving in the administration of Theoderic the Great, king of the Ostrogoths."

But he's citing Clement of Alexandria's Hypotyposeis

Toto · 06-11-2013, 12:59 PM

Why would the Latinisms imply an elite group?

stephan huller · 06-11-2013, 01:02 PM

von Harnack, New Testament Studies IV (1911) notes with his side by side comparison of Eusebius and Cassiodorus (above) that:

Quote:

This particular trait ("coram quibusdam Csesareanis equitibus"), which is wanting in the Greek text, was perhaps inserted by the translator from the Acts of Peter. (p. 128)

stephan huller · 06-11-2013, 01:06 PM

Quote:

Why would the Latinisms imply an elite group?

Not the Latinisms on their own but the Latinisms taken with the claim of Clement that Roman knights requested the production of the gospel of Mark. I've never understood how the Latinisms crept into the text. If the original text of 'Peter' - to follow Clement's story - was Aramaic, what is the possible profile of the individual who could read Aramaic but could only translate it into Greek drawing heavily from Latin terminology? I wonder if Mark was writing with his Patron's in mind.

stephan huller · 06-11-2013, 01:25 PM

In favor of Clement's testimony pointing to close proximity of Imperial household, Michael Kok's summary of Michael Peppard’s The Son of God in the Roman World: Divine Sonship in Its Social and Political Context who "points to Clement’s Adumbrationes on 1 Peter 5:13 (preserved only in Latin by Cassiodorus, 6th century founder of monastery & library at Vivarium, Italy) as suggesting an imperial context for Mark’s readership as it is addressed to men of the equestrian order (coram quibusdam Caesareanis equitibus) in close proximity to the imperial household (senior local magistrates, councillors, high priests of imperial cult) (90)."

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

06-11-2013, 12:47 PM	#2
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	Marcus, Petri sectator, praedicante Petro evangelium palam Romae coram quibusdam Caesareanis equitibus et multa Christi testimonia proferente, petitus ab eis, ut possent quae dicebantur memoriae commendare, scripsit ex his quae a Petro dicta sunt evangelium quod secundum Marcum vocitatur (Adumbrationes in epistolas canonicas in 1 Peter 5:13) Mark, the follower of Peter, while Peter was publically preaching the Gospel at Rome in the presence of some of Caesar’s knights and uttering many testimonies of Christ, on their asking him to let them have a written record of the things which had been said, wrote the Gospel which is called the Gospel of Mark, form the things said by Peter… (Bernard Orchard in The Order of the Synoptics (or via: amazon.co.uk), pg 131)

06-11-2013, 12:56 PM	#4
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	Why do you think this evidence for an imperial theory? It claims that Peter preached to the Roman legions, which sounds dubious to start out with, and then they asked Mark to write it all down. . . But this story doesn't show up until the time of Flavius Magnus Aurelius Cassiodorus Senator (c. 485 – c. 585) " a Roman statesman and writer, serving in the administration of Theoderic the Great, king of the Ostrogoths."

06-11-2013, 12:58 PM	#5
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	Well they ask for the manufacture of the gospel of Mark and there are 'Latinisms' in the existing text. It reinforces the idea that the material was made by or for an elite group of people in the Imperial capitol.

06-11-2013, 12:59 PM	#7
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	Why would the Latinisms imply an elite group?

06-11-2013, 01:25 PM	#10
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	In favor of Clement's testimony pointing to close proximity of Imperial household, Michael Kok's summary of Michael Peppard’s The Son of God in the Roman World: Divine Sonship in Its Social and Political Context who "points to Clement’s Adumbrationes on 1 Peter 5:13 (preserved only in Latin by Cassiodorus, 6th century founder of monastery & library at Vivarium, Italy) as suggesting an imperial context for Mark’s readership as it is addressed to men of the equestrian order (coram quibusdam Caesareanis equitibus) in close proximity to the imperial household (senior local magistrates, councillors, high priests of imperial cult) (90)."

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.