Freethought & Rationalism Archive

stephan huller · 07-01-2012, 07:30 PM

I had never come across this before. I don't think most Marcionophiles know about this one.

Quote:

During the reign of Hadrian a man named Marcion disseminated the loathsome Manichaean belief, saying that the creation of the world had come about through some evil being. He subverted many Hellenes, Jews and Christians and won them over to his teachings as the most learned Clement has recorded. [Book Eleven] http://en.calameo.com/read/000675905f2f4bf509d49

I assume Clement is Clement of Alexandria. Notice the reference to 'Jews' being brought over to Marcionitism. Having been saying that for some time.

I notice that John Malalas makes many reference to the Manichaeans. Places 'Cerdo' in the third century.

stephan huller · 07-01-2012, 07:38 PM

Another interesting reference in Book 10:

Quote:

He [Domitian] punished many other Christians with the result that a number of the fled to Pontus as Bottius the learned chronicler has written about them

Manes is said to have been alive at this time (!)

stephan huller · 07-01-2012, 07:46 PM

More:

Quote:

Titus celebrated a triumph for his victory and went off to Rome. Out of the spoils of Judea Vespasian built in Antioch the Great (= Syria) outside the city gate what are known as the Cherubim for he fixed there the bronze Cherubim which Titus his son had found fixed to the temple of Solomon. When he destroyed the temple, he removed them from there and brought them to Antioch with the Seraphim celebrating a triumph for the victory of the Jews which had taken place during his reign. He set on an upper level a bronze statue in honor of Selene with four bulls facing Jerusalem for he had captured the city at night by moonlight.

Huon · 07-02-2012, 12:01 AM

For those who never heard of John Malalas :

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wikipedia

John Malalas (c. 491 – 578) was a Greek chronicler from Antioch (Syria).

Except for the history of Justinian and his immediate predecessors, it possesses little historical value; the author, "relying on Eusebius of Caesarea and other compilers, confidently strung together myths, biblical stories, and real history."

[Warren Treadgold, A History of Byzantine State and Society (Stanford University Press, 1997: ISBN 0-8047-2421-0), p. 267. ]

tanya · 07-02-2012, 06:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

I notice that John Malalas makes many reference to the Manichaeans. Places 'Cerdo' in the third century.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Huon

it (John Malalas' text) possesses little historical value

Well, I am confused.

1. I assume that Stephan, authority on anything having relationship with Alexandria, believes that Cerdo was an early second century bishop of that fine town.

2. Cerdo obviously cannot be both an early second century bishop, and someone influenced, even slightly, by Mani, a mid-third century Persian.

3. I am certain, from reading several references to the writings of the early third century cleric, Clement of Alexandria, that Stephan understands the impossibility of accuracy in this text, which he cites, ostensibly by Malalas.

4. Why is this obscure bit of fluff posted here? n.b. the link does not work, for those of us who have disabled propaganda generating web devices.

:huh:

Roger Pearse · 07-02-2012, 02:10 PM

Interesting -- thank you Stephan.

The Byzantine chroniclers usually tried to write World Chronicles, starting with Creation, and running down to their own times. For periods before their own days they relied on older material. Not all of those sources are now extant, so writers like Malalas can be useful sources.

For the period from Creation up to 325 AD, they relied on Eusebius' Chronicle, sometimes at second hand, supplemented from the bible plus whatever apocryphal literature they had to hand. This material gets increasingly distorted as the period progresses. You can get an idea of just how much, by looking at the opening sections of Agapius (in the 10th century, working in Arabic).

The Byzantine chroniclers should have been able to disentangle what happened when, since Eusebius did specify this in his tables of dates and events. Unfortunately that work did not survive in Greek, indicating that it fell out of circulation in favour of narrative text rather than tabular data.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

stephan huller · 07-02-2012, 02:32 PM

clement does say marcion was active in Hadrian's time (Strom 7.106). he is actually using clement

Iskander · 07-02-2012, 03:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tanya

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

I notice that John Malalas makes many reference to the Manichaeans. Places 'Cerdo' in the third century.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Huon

it (John Malalas' text) possesses little historical value

Well, I am confused.

1. I assume that Stephan, authority on anything having relationship with Alexandria, believes that Cerdo was an early second century bishop of that fine town.

2. Cerdo obviously cannot be both an early second century bishop, and someone influenced, even slightly, by Mani, a mid-third century Persian.

3. I am certain, from reading several references to the writings of the early third century cleric, Clement of Alexandria, that Stephan understands the impossibility of accuracy in this text, which he cites, ostensibly by Malalas.

4. Why is this obscure bit of fluff posted here? n.b. the link does not work, for those of us who have disabled propaganda generating web devices.

:huh:

Malalas did not write for the cultured public, but for those with a naive curiosity and plenty of time to waste.

The “ chronographia” would be the ancient equivalent of The Simpsons and modern scholars like them because <edit>

Quote:

Malalas was a heretic... He wrote not for the cultured public but for the bulk of the lay-men and monks, seeking to gratify their naive curiosity in matters of history and narrating such facts only and in such manner as could interest the people.

The "Chronographia" is uncritical and teems with legends, anachronisms, repetitions, and inconsistencies, and its style and language are in keeping with the nature of the concept of history it exhibits

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08466c.htm

mountainman · 07-02-2012, 11:19 PM

In post 1 there is a reporting of Manichaeanism in the rule of Hadrian and in post 2 the presence of Manes in the rule of Domitian. Mani appears c.240 CE. What's happening?

Also how is Marcion related to Mani (or Marcionism to Manichaeanism) (or vice verse)?

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

07-02-2012, 02:10 PM	#6
Roger Pearse Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: N/A Posts: 4,370	Interesting -- thank you Stephan. The Byzantine chroniclers usually tried to write World Chronicles, starting with Creation, and running down to their own times. For periods before their own days they relied on older material. Not all of those sources are now extant, so writers like Malalas can be useful sources. For the period from Creation up to 325 AD, they relied on Eusebius' Chronicle, sometimes at second hand, supplemented from the bible plus whatever apocryphal literature they had to hand. This material gets increasingly distorted as the period progresses. You can get an idea of just how much, by looking at the opening sections of Agapius (in the 10th century, working in Arabic). The Byzantine chroniclers should have been able to disentangle what happened when, since Eusebius did specify this in his tables of dates and events. Unfortunately that work did not survive in Greek, indicating that it fell out of circulation in favour of narrative text rather than tabular data. All the best, Roger Pearse

07-02-2012, 02:32 PM	#7
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	clement does say marcion was active in Hadrian's time (Strom 7.106). he is actually using clement

07-02-2012, 11:19 PM	#9
mountainman Contributor Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Falls Creek, Oz. Posts: 11,192	In post 1 there is a reporting of Manichaeanism in the rule of Hadrian and in post 2 the presence of Manes in the rule of Domitian. Mani appears c.240 CE. What's happening? Also how is Marcion related to Mani (or Marcionism to Manichaeanism) (or vice verse)?

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.