Freethought & Rationalism Archive

C_Mucius_Scaevola · 12-21-2005, 07:16 AM

I often see Tacitus mentioned here as an extra-Biblical source in support of an HJ .However ,I reacently read a book which claims the "Annals" were forged by a medieval Italian "relic-hunter" .
http://www.blackmask.com/thatway/books129c/7tcbrdex.htm
I realise this book is over 100 years old and the debate must have moved on since then , so can anyone enlighten me further on this ?

John A. Broussard · 12-21-2005, 07:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by C_Mucius_Scaevola

I often see Tacitus mentioned here as an extra-Biblical source in support of an HJ .However ,I reacently read a book which claims the "Annals" were forged by a medieval Italian "relic-hunter" .
http://www.blackmask.com/thatway/books129c/7tcbrdex.htm
I realise this book is over 100 years old and the debate must have moved on since then , so can anyone enlighten me further on this ?

If I remember correctly, Tacitus--forged or not--comments on the existence of a group of Christians and says nothing about the HJ.

I'll be happy to have someone correct my assumption.

Ben C Smith · 12-21-2005, 07:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by John A. Broussard

If I remember correctly, Tacitus--forged or not--comments on the existence of a group of Christians and says nothing about the HJ.

I'll be happy to have someone correct my assumption.

You may be thinking of Pliny, or possibly Suetonius, since Tacitus does mention the crucifixion under Pontius Pilate.

Ben.

C_Mucius_Scaevola · 12-21-2005, 07:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by John A. Broussard

If I remember correctly, Tacitus--forged or not--comments on the existence of a group of Christians and says nothing about the HJ.

I'll be happy to have someone correct my assumption.

In the Annals :Nero fastened the guilt . . . on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of . . . Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome. . . .
OK , it mentions "Christus " rather than "Jesus" ...The thing is , it's often brought up by xians as evidence in support of an HJ - usually in the same breath as Josephus is mentioned .Is the one as authentic as the other ?

Amaleq13 · 12-21-2005, 09:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by C_Mucius_Scaevola

Is the one as authentic as the other ?

I believe there are some who deny the authenticity of Tacitus but, IIUC, most scholars consider it a genuine example of the vague knowledge early outsiders had about the beliefs of Christians.

Josephus' TF is widely recognized by scholars as having been tampered with by Christians but many feel free to speculate about the "original text" though there is no clear evidence that any such text ever existed.

The shorter reference to Jesus is widely accepted by scholars as genuine despite the apparently unique use of "Christ" and equally unique construction of the phrase (ie Jesus referenced first though James is the actual focus of the story).

C_Mucius_Scaevola · 12-21-2005, 10:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amaleq13

I believe there are some who deny the authenticity of Tacitus but, IIUC, most scholars consider it a genuine example of the vague knowledge early outsiders had about the beliefs of Christians.

Josephus' TF is widely recognized by scholars as having been tampered with by Christians but many feel free to speculate about the "original text" though there is no clear evidence that any such text ever existed.

The shorter reference to Jesus is widely accepted by scholars as genuine despite the apparently unique use of "Christ" and equally unique construction of the phrase (ie Jesus referenced first though James is the actual focus of the story).

Thanks ,Amaleq ,but your reply just illustrates my problem with the Tacitus thing as opposed to the TF .Josephus has been very visibly discussed ,debated and dissected here and elsewhere , but this one book is the only source I've seen that discusses Tacitus as a possible forgery . What happened to this line of inquiry ?Was it just dismissed by scholars or does anyone know any further reading that might be useful to me ?

Julian · 12-21-2005, 11:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by C_Mucius_Scaevola

Thanks ,Amaleq ,but your reply just illustrates my problem with the Tacitus thing as opposed to the TF .Josephus has been very visibly discussed ,debated and dissected here and elsewhere , but this one book is the only source I've seen that discusses Tacitus as a possible forgery . What happened to this line of inquiry ?Was it just dismissed by scholars or does anyone know any further reading that might be useful to me ?

Here are a variety of viewpoints on Tacitus, scroll down: http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/tacitus.html

Julian

Toto · 12-21-2005, 11:21 AM

The issue has been discussed here more recently. Andrew Criddle argues against forgery in this thread. I think there are other discussions.

There are modern people who make a case that Tacitus was forged.

Example: Christianism.com

Frank Zindler in American Atheists

Quote:

There are further problems with the Tacitus story. Tacitus himself never again alludes to the Neronian persecution of Christians in any of his voluminous writings, and no other Pagan authors know anything of the outrage either. Most significant, however, is that ancient Christian apologists made no use of the story in their propaganda - an unthinkable omission by motivated partisans who were well-read in the works of Tacitus. Clement of Alexandria, who made a profession of collecting just such types of quotations, is ignorant of any Neronian persecution, and even Tertullian, who quotes a great deal from Tacitus, knows nothing of the story. According to Robert Taylor, the author of another freethought classic, the Diegesis (1834), the passage was not known before the fifteenth century, when Tacitus was first published at Venice by Johannes de Spire. Taylor believed de Spire himself to have been the forger.

I think Zindler expands on this in his book The Jesus the Jews Never Knew

AskWhy.com

Quote:

Tacitus never again alludes to the Neronian persecution of Christians in any of his voluminous writings, and no other Pagan authors know anything of the outrage either. No ancient Christian apologists made no use of the story in their propaganda—an unthinkable omission by motivated partisans who were well-read in the works of Tacitus. Clement of Alexandria, who made a profession of collecting just such types of quotations, is ignorant of any Neronian persecution, and even Tertullian, who quotes a great deal from Tacitus, knows nothing of the story.

Robert Taylor says the passage was not known before the fifteenth century, when Tacitus was first published at Venice by Johannes de Spire. The counter argument is that the whole passage matches the distinctive style of Tacitus. A distinctive style can, however, be easily imitated in a short passage, and there is an important lapse from normal Tacitean usage in that these Christians are humani generis, haters of the human race. Tacitus universally writes generis humani.

C_Mucius_Scaevola · 12-21-2005, 11:31 AM

Thanks ,Toto . That's just the kind of thing I was looking for

countjulian · 12-21-2005, 11:49 AM

Quote:

Robert Taylor says the passage was not known before the fifteenth century, when Tacitus was first published at Venice by Johannes de Spire. The counter argument is that the whole passage matches the distinctive style of Tacitus. A distinctive style can, however, be easily imitated in a short passage, and there is an important lapse from normal Tacitean usage in that these Christians are humani generis, haters of the human race. Tacitus universally writes generis humani.

Although I agree that the passage was forged, it coul not have been in the fifteenth but had to have been in the fifth. Sulpicius Severus mentioned it in his fanciful "Chronicle", and the forged correspondance between Seneca and Paul mentioned the persecution in the late fourth/early fifth, which indicates the legend sprang up around this time.

12-21-2005, 07:16 AM	#1
C_Mucius_Scaevola Veteran Member Join Date: May 2005 Location: Amsterdam,NL Posts: 2,015	Tacitus I often see Tacitus mentioned here as an extra-Biblical source in support of an HJ .However ,I reacently read a book which claims the "Annals" were forged by a medieval Italian "relic-hunter" . http://www.blackmask.com/thatway/books129c/7tcbrdex.htm I realise this book is over 100 years old and the debate must have moved on since then , so can anyone enlighten me further on this ?

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

12-21-2005, 11:31 AM	#9
C_Mucius_Scaevola Veteran Member Join Date: May 2005 Location: Amsterdam,NL Posts: 2,015	Thanks ,Toto . That's just the kind of thing I was looking for

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.