aa5874

http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/pliny.html

DCHindley

That translation -aa- quoted is easily found on the Internet, but not once it seems is the source credited. Looking further, it appears to be from The letters of the younger Pliny; literally translated by John Delaware Lewis (1879) by John Delaware Lewis, 1828-1884.

The site that Andrew provided a link to is interesting in that it used a Latin text from the 1915 Loeb edition (edited by W.M. Hutchinson). Even though the Loeb edition also had a matching English translation (the 1746 English translation by William Melmoth, revised by W.M. Hutchinson), for the English the web site switches to an earlier translation in the Harvard Classics series (1909-1914), which is also translated by William Melmoth (although revised by F. C. T. Bosanquet).

FWIW, the current (copyrighted) Loeb edition is translated by Betty Radice. Encyclopedia Britannica says "One of the best modern editions of the letters and his panegyric to Trajan is by M. Schuster in the Teubner series (2nd ed., 1952)."

You have to wonder whether the translations that mention execution and capital punishment are not reading it into a text that mentions only punishment and being "ordered led away."

A really bad digital text copy of the Lewis translation is here:
http://www.archive.org/details/lette...nger00plinuoft

DCH

Clivedurdle

Or prison is an incorrect term - did prisons exist as a form of punishment? Yes people were held for trial but that is not the same thing.

I understand prison as a form of punishment to be a clear xian invention following from monasteries where someone is meant to contemplate their sins. None of these ideas existed in the Roman world as we understand them now.

Prisons have various functions - storage of people you do not know what to do with or there are bureaucratic delays before you can do something, some idea that it is a punishment, some idea of contemplation of your sinful actions, some idea of protecting society from you.

In fact a series of religious assumptions are built into them, and the translators do seem to have carried their assumptions into this text - execution in fact makes logical sense as the correct translation.

rlogan

The fordham site is giving this citation:


An interesting disagreement in these translations. I'd prefer not to speculate which one is correct.

It bears on whether the punishment for refusal to acknowledge the supremacy of the roman gods and emperor was execution or prison though.

Pliny is clear though that he was unsure at the time he wrote whether being a christian was a crime in and of itself sufficient for specific punishment, or just the "crimes attendant to it".

aa5874

And this is what makes the letter somewhat problematic.

Christians were brought before him.

The people who brought the Christians must have known that Christians contravened a known law.

Pliny must know the laws concerning Christians.

Pliny must know what is the penalty for being a Christian.

Now, if they were no laws on the books against Christians, their cases should have been dismissed.

It should be noted that Trajan in his reply to Pliny did not make reference to any law or decree against Christianity.

Clivedurdle

But prison was then not a punishment! That idea was not invented until possibly the Enlightenment!

If that idea is there there are serious questions about the authenticity of this letter!

Clivedurdle

Not against xians specifically but definitely against non authorised associations and definitely against political groups not sacrificing to the gods and the emperor god = treason = summary execution.

What the problem is that they allegedly looked harmless but actually they were also destroying temple trade, infecting the minds of slaves and women.

Which makes me think this letter is fake because this group is obviously breaking a whole series of obvious rules - there was nothing to consult about!

And when is this letter dated to? Oh yes, middle of the Jewish wars. What were the Jewish wars about? Which god? Jews could argue a get out of jail free card as a religio but they were still hit hard by the Romans.

There is no way a senior Roman faced by slave classes and women spouting superstitios that involved refusing sacrificing to the emperor god would have treated them leniently! They had not forgotten Spartacus!

And waste the Emperor's time on this?

andrewcriddle

If you read Pliny's correspondence with the Emperor as a whole he does raise some apparently very minor points. Eg is it OK to organise a fire brigade ?

Andrew Criddle

rlogan

Huh? It is a perfectly straightforward letter on the face of it.

He passed a law against secret societies. He says there are things Christians do (eg refuse to acknowledge the supremacy of the Roman Gods) that are apart from Christianity and he does not know if he should punish people for being Christians or just because their association has ancillary illegal aspects.

Disagree. He is asking Trajan so obviously he doesn't know, and also obvious that he is punishing them for ancillary crimes, not Christianity per se.

Because there was no such law.

There was a law against secret societies.

Clivedurdle

Actually that is clear evidence of forgery - the main example of voluntary societies law was from Rome and was guess what - about a voluntary association to have a fire brigade - that the emperor banned!

A senior Roman Officer by asking about is it OK to have a voluntary fire brigade is in serious danger of appearing treacherous himself!