Freethought & Rationalism Archive

spin · 10-02-2013, 03:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by watersbeak

Ignorance: yup, I have it. uneducated. haven't read any of the tomes mentioned in this thread.

Quote:

Originally Posted by watersbeak

More coin nonsense:

https://isaw.nyu.edu/exhibitions/edg...t-dura-europos

Quote:

A single coin of the Roman emperor
Constantius II also indicates fourth-century or later activity

100% indeed.

Anything changes the dating of the embankment or the Dura fragment? That's irrelevant, of course. What seems to matter is foppish pedantry.

stephan huller · 10-02-2013, 03:39 PM

Yeah on a 70s detective show this one coin would be the proof that broke down the resolve of the murderer. "I did it! I did it! I confess." If only life was a 70s TV show

mountainman · 10-02-2013, 04:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by watersbeak

More coin nonsense:

https://isaw.nyu.edu/exhibitions/edg...t-dura-europos

Quote:

A single coin of the Roman emperor
Constantius II also indicates fourth-century or later activity

100% indeed.

Nice find Sam. There is also other evidence besides this coin that the city of Dura Europos was inhabited well after the mid 3rd century. Of all these later bits of evidence, the Christian hermit of the mid 4th century (after Vaticanus was published with Greek nomina sacra) may provide some negative evidence against the 100% security of the mid 3rd century terminus ad quem for DF24.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Page 71

A fifth-century Syriac document, the Life of the Martyr Mu’Ain, reports that a Christian hermit lived there during the reign of the Sasanid emperor Shapur II (d. 379). [24]

A single coin of the Roman emperor Constantius II also indicates fourth-century or later activity.

Seven lamps that can be fifth century or later were recorded by the Yale/French excavations. [25]

More definitively, figure 3-20 illustrates a rim fragment of a Phocaean Red-Slip Hayes form 3,26 a very common fifth-century form that appears in the western Mediterranean as well as in the British Isles. [27]

I still think that an assessment of a 90% secure terminus ad quem is generous. The author also refers to the "scientific standards" of the early 20th century Yale/French excavations. The way some of the respondents in this thread have been high-handedly pushing for a 100% secure terminus ad quem for Dura Parchment 24 makes me think they are entertaining the foppish pedantry that the excavation of the embankment was conducted by a 21st century CSI team.

Toto · 10-02-2013, 04:43 PM

But did this Christian hermit excavate the fortifications and plant evidence?

mountainman · 10-02-2013, 06:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

...

As a result of this situation, which persists today, the significance of the Dura Parchment 24 was extremely unique, because it offered a method of dating (by means of an archaeological terminus ad quem) which was NOT entirely reliant upon palaeographical assessment. That Kraeling (or anyone else in the field in 1933 etc) was not aware of this unique significance cannot be maintained.

Then surely you can supply a quote from Kraeling that shows this?

Well perhaps I am mistaken and Dura Parchment 24 is not the sole exemplar of an "early Christian related papyri fragment" for which the method of dating includes an archaeologically related terminus ad quem, in which case, by all means, cite a second.

Quote:

But my point was that Kraeling would not have thought that establishing that Christianity predated the 4th century was an issue.

I agree.

Quote:

This implies that there would be no impetus to find evidence for the existence of Christianity.

The investigative impetus of archaeological and manuscript discoveries is alone sufficient, so I strongly disagree with this implication.

Quote:

Forgeries and fraud have a pattern. They tend to have a financial angle, and they tend to relate to current controversies.

Confirmation bias is IMO more likely than fraud in this instance.

Quote:

I suggest you read Grenfell and Hunt on the dates of early Christian codices : setting the record straight by Brent Nongbri.

How does this relate to the issue?

The article helps set the academic environment of 1935 when Kraeling wrote. Grenfell and Hunt had dominated the field for some decades. Kraeling wrote the year after Hunt died. Palaeography (alone) was being used to date the ever increasing "early Christian related papyri" finds.

Quote:

This fragment is not being dated by paleography.

It is being dated by palaeography IN ADDITION TO the archaeological terminus ad quem. The following from Kraeling (1935)

Quote:

Originally Posted by CARL H. KRAELING

Date.

In attempting to date the fragment by its script the natural procedure would be to fall back upon the extensive body of evidence for the Greek and Latin palaeography of Mesopotamia which the excavations at Dura have produced. But this is unfortunately impossible, because, with the exception of the present text and pieces of a Hebrew prayer-roll as yet unpublished, the parchments and papyri discovered at Dura are of the non-literary type. Since fluctuation in the literary script is far less pronounced than that manifested by business hands, it is entirely legitimate to fall back upon the Greek palaeography of Egypt for purposes of comparison. This comparison shows that the hand of the Dura parchment is an early fore-runner of the "severe" or "Bible style" of the fourth century A.D., and that it may safely be assigned to the first half of the third Christian century.1

The date which palaeography suggests for the fragment is confirmed and rendered more precise by archaeology. The embankment along the city wall, in which the parchment was found, was constructed after 254 and before 256-257 A.D. Of these dates the first is that of Dura Papyrus 90, which was buried under the glacis? while the second is the presumptive date of the capture and final destruction of the city by Shapur I. This gives a definite upper limit to the date of the fragment.

mountainman · 10-02-2013, 06:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

But did this Christian hermit excavate the fortifications and plant evidence?

Hermits have been known to excavate caves. Christian hermits have been known to carry manuscript evidence. Over sixteen hundred centuries had passed the excavation site by before the 20th century arrived. Who really knows how this fragment got there? Hopkins openly states it was a mystery. History must deal with uncertainties, and these may be expressed as probabilities.

stephan huller · 10-02-2013, 06:53 PM

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha

mountainman · 10-02-2013, 06:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Michael I. Rostovtzeff: Res Gestae Divi Saporis and Dura

Quote:

No wonder that the reconstruction of this period by modern historians, based as it is on such evidence, varies greatly and is far from satisfactory....

This does not prevent Kraeling from concluding (without doubt) that

Quote:

The foregoing analysis of the Dura fragment shows that it belonged without doubt to a copy of Tatian's Diatessaron, and that it preserves its text with a relatively high degree of fidelity.

"Without doubt"? Was Kraeling a theologian without any confirmation bias?

stephan huller · 10-02-2013, 07:01 PM

I am tired of dealing with the freak show crowd. Is this all you can do? Just cut a sentence out of context?

Quote:

The time between the death of Maximinus, or better from the beginning of the rule of Gordian Ill to the end of the rule of Gallienus is the darkest period in the history of the Roman Empire, darkest in two senses of the word, inasmuch as it was the time of greatest misery for the Roman Empire, and at the same time a period concerning which our information is meager, vague, and contradictory. The literary sources - Latin, Greek, and Oriental - consist mostly of late epitomes of historical works of earlier date. The dates of the events are mostly uncertain, and the narrative is fragmentary and often full of legendary details. To supplement the literary evidence we have some inscriptions and papyri. This documentary evidence, however, is extremely poor in comparison with similar evidence for the preceding period in the history of the Roman Empire. Finally the coins, though abundant, are difficult to date precisely and to assign to corresponding mints. No wonder that the reconstruction of this period by modern historians, based as it is on such evidence, varies greatly and is far from satisfactory.1

Extremely poor for the Roman Empire in general, our evidence is somewhat fuller for the Eastern part of the Empire, since here we are in possession, in addition to the Greek and Latin historical works dealing with the whole of the Roman Empire, of some fragments and reflections of literary productions of the East, partly incorporated in general surveys of ancient history, as for instance the chronicle of Malalas, partly preserved

And here's the fucking footnote

1 . The sources for the history of the mid third century A.D. are listed in the bibliographies of CAH, XII, chs. IV and VI (A. Christensen, N. Ensslin and A. Alföldi). They are discussed in brief in the Appendix: Sources, pp. 710-720 by N. H. Baynes (literary sources) and A. Alföldi (coins). A good bibliography of the modern works which deal with this period in general will be found in the bibliographies to the chapters of CAH quoted above, cf. A. Alföldi, Berytus, IV, 1937, P. 54, n. 23. The evidence regarding the Orient in the mid third century which concerns us here has been subjected to careful analysis by several modern historians, the last contributions being the two substantial articles of A. Alföldi: "Die Hauptereignisse der Jahre 253-261 n. Chr. im Orient im Spiegel der Münzprägung," Berytus, IV, 1937, pp. 41 ff. and "Die römische Münzprägung und die historischen Ereignisse im Osten zwischen 260 und 270 n. Chr.," ibid. V, 1938, pp. 47 ff. (cf. his, Christensen's and Ensslin's chapters in CAH, XII cited above). A new reconstruction of the history of the Orient in mid third century based on the Oracula Sibyllina, XIII and the Res Gestae. of Shapuhr will be found in A. T. Olmstead's substantial paper, "The mid-third Century of the Christian Era," Classical Philology, XXXVII, 1942, pp. 241 ff. and 398 ff.

stephan huller · 10-02-2013, 07:02 PM

What does any of this have to do with the question of whether Christianity was already in existence in the third century?

Nothing

Dura Europos disproves Pete ten year spam quest.

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

10-02-2013, 03:39 PM	#232
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	Yeah on a 70s detective show this one coin would be the proof that broke down the resolve of the murderer. "I did it! I did it! I confess." If only life was a 70s TV show

10-02-2013, 04:43 PM	#234
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	But did this Christian hermit excavate the fortifications and plant evidence?

10-02-2013, 06:53 PM	#237
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha

10-02-2013, 07:02 PM	#240
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	What does any of this have to do with the question of whether Christianity was already in existence in the third century? Nothing Dura Europos disproves Pete ten year spam quest.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.