Freethought & Rationalism Archive

mountainman · 10-15-2006, 07:11 PM

The quote below was taken from here:

Quote:

Historia Augusta: modern name of a collection of (bogus) biographies of Roman emperors of the second and third centuries. The collection of biographies of Roman emperors called Historia Augusta consists of the lives of most rulers from Hadrian (117-138) to Carinus (283-285). They can be divided into two groups:

Hadrian to Gordian III (117-244), dedicated to the emperor Diocletian
(284-305), and written by four authors;

Valerian to Carinus (253-285), dedicated to Constantine I the Great
(306-337), and written by two authors.

...

At first sight, it looks as if during the reign of Constantine the Great, Trebellius Pollio and Flavius Vopiscus continued a project that had been started during the reign of Diocletian by Spartianus, Capitolinus, Lampridius, and Gallicanus.

The biographies of the emperors between 244 and 253 (Philippus Arabs, Decius, Trebonianus Gallus, Aemilianus) are missing, which is a pity, because here, we would have expected some sort of introduction to the second half of the Historia Augusta.

The fact that there seem to be two groups is interesting, because the four first authors lived during the reign of Diocletian, who persecuted the Christians, whereas Pollio and Vopiscus lived during the reign of the first Christian ruler of the Roman empire. Now the work appears to be written by people who shared a common outlook on the past, and agreed to the values of the pagan senatorial aristocracy of Rome.

We would love to know whether the two teams knew each other,
or whether the second team was working for or against Constantine.

Or was there just the one specialist team, working away
solidly -- in the second period only -- under Constantine?
This is another possibility, apparently not yet considered.

Anyway, the quote continues ...

Quote:

Unfortunately, the prologue to the first part of the work is also missing. Here, the first four authors must have explained something about the aim of their project. It is also sad that the lives of Nerva and Trajan are lost; had they been there, we would have had some sort of bridge between the Lives of the Twelve Caesars by Suetonius and the Historia Augusta.

So we are left with a collection of imperial biographies that is damaged at precisely the two points where its authors might have explained what they were doing. Yet, probably the two lacunas are not coincidental at all, because the Historia Augusta is something like an ancient mockumentary.

As long ago as 1889, it has been suggested that the work was composed by one single author. (This idea was proposed by the great German Altertumswissenschaftler Hermann Dessau in a classic essay "Über Zeit und Persönlichkeit der Scriptor Historiae Augustae", in the journal Hermes.) A more recent stylistic analysis using computer techniques has confirmed this hypothesis beyond reasonable doubt. But the six fake authors and the fake division into an earlier and a later phase of composition, are only the beginning of a lovely game of hide and seek.

One of the most charming aspects is the introduction of fake information, especially in the second half. At least one ruler has been invented, remarkable omens are introduced, and anecdotes are added. The information in the second half of the life of the decadent emperor Heliogabalus is very entertaining, but completely untrue, and only introduced as a contrast to the biography of his successor Severus Alexander, who is presented as the ideal ruler. Ancient readers must have loved these mirror images, and may have smiled when the author of the Life of Heliogabalus accused other authors of making up charges to discredit the emperor, and used them all the same.

This is familiar territory and topography for those who have
read Eusebius' "Historia Ecclesiastica".

Has any person before today entertained the notion that
the "Historia Augusta" was written by Eusebius under
Constantine?

Some research suggests a date towards the end of the 4th century
due to use of references by at least 2 4th century historians, such
as the following summary taken from here

Quote:

The Historia Augusta is a collection of 'Lives' of second and third century Roman emperors and usurpers. The biographies - beginning with Hadrian (117-138) and ending with Carus, Numerian & Carinus (282-285) - purport to have been written by six (otherwise unknown) authors of the late third/early fourth centuries. It is generally thought, however, that it actually originated in the late fourth century, and that it is the work of one author.

"... the six authors occasionally mention each other, claim for themselves lives which have been attributed in the manuscripts to others of the six, in a few lives make most unlikely dedications to the emperors Diocletian [284-305] and Constantine [306-337], and claim to use sources which range from acceptably solid Greek and Latin works, to apparently fake histories concocted in their own imaginations. This free-wheeling conduct on the part of the authors has therefore led to a series of works that range in quality from those of reasonably secure sources of historical fact, to fantasies which have their 'historical' sources in the fabrications of the authors."

The above summary of the 'Historia Augusta' is by Dr. Penelope J. Gurney and Lyman W. Gurney. They have carried out a computer (stylometric) analysis of the work, which has led them to conclude that:

"The preponderance of evidence at present in our research points to a degree of multiple authorship (or of authors plus editor). Yet the question of authorship of the 'Historia Augusta' may never be solved to the satisfaction of all, and it probably cannot be solved by stylometric methods alone; but a judicious balance between stylometric and literary and historical techniques will improve our understanding of this interesting, controversial, and infuriating work."

Finally, from

Constantius_Chlorus:

Quote:

The Historia Augusta says Constantius was the son of Eutropius, a noble from Dardania, and Claudia, a niece of the emperors Claudius II and Quintillus.[3] However, historians suspect this connection to be a genealogical fabrication created by his grandson Constantine II, thus connecting his family to two rather highly regarded predecessors

Fabrication of Constantine's geneology may not have been
beyond Constantine himself, for the sake of "appearances".

Pete Brown

God Fearing Atheist · 10-15-2006, 07:54 PM

:banghead:

gstafleu · 10-16-2006, 06:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

Has any person before today entertained the notion that
the "Historia Augusta" was written by Eusebius under
Constantine?

Wouldn't the stylometric techniques mentioned in your various quotes be able to say something about that?

BTW, they should also be able to throw some light on your hypothesis of (more or less single) authorship of the NT. Any progress on that front?

Gerard

andrewcriddle · 10-16-2006, 11:14 AM

The Historia Augusta is generally supposed to have discreet anti-Christian satirical touches.

Eusebius would not have approved.

Andrew Criddle

Clivedurdle · 10-16-2006, 11:22 AM

Quote:

who persecuted the Christians

Can we be careful here? I see persecution of xians as xian propaganda.

From a Roman perspective, the Romans were using lawful state powers to prosecute a clearly treacherous superstitio - who committed treason by refusing to sacrifice to the gods - the equivalent of refusing to take an oath of allegiance.

And actually, if we have clear Roman records that they did prosecute criminal members of a messianic superstitio, is that not clear evidence of the existence of this sect?

Clivedurdle · 10-16-2006, 11:38 AM

This is probably in the wrong thread, but p 181 following of Terry Jones Barbarians (or via: amazon.co.uk) states:

Quote:

Shapur and the Messiah

Religious philosophy was the big issue in both Persia and Rome. the continuous military hammering between Rome and Parthia had not onlybrought about a crisis in Persia, it was also the major cause of the crisis that afflicted the Roman Empire in the third century. ...Trade between Rome and the Far East broke down....the cost of the Roman army sky rocketed, and sections of the Western Empire began to break free of central authority...This was the atmosphere in which Christianity began to take hold in the Roman world, and in the buzzing atmosphere of the Zoroastrian revolution in Persia, Christian spin off cults were attracting serious interest.

In Fars a cult called the Practitioners of Ablutions believed in the washing away of sins in baptisms. A messianic Jewish- Christian group called Elkesaites ...had their own version of the teachings of Christ and of Moses. In this rather fevered atmosphere a religious teacher appeared called Mani who claimed that he was the final prophet in a line that stretched from Zarathustra through Buddha to Jesus.

Shapur....proclaimed freedom of worship for Manichaens, Jews and Christians....There now even appeared a Christian bishop of Ctesiphon

http://www.fsmitha.com/h1/ch22.htm

( I am discussing Shapur I )

Quote:

A Christian bishop, Papa bar Aggai, at the capital, Ctesiphon, claimed patriarchal rights - as had the Bishop of Rome - and the bishop of Ctesiphon remained in rivalry for influence with the Christian leadership in Nisibis.

mountainman · 10-17-2006, 04:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gstafleu

Wouldn't the stylometric techniques mentioned in your various quotes be able to say something about that?

BTW, they should also be able to throw some light on your hypothesis of (more or less single) authorship of the NT. Any progress on that front?

Gerard

Thanks for the contribution Gerard,

Good points which should be followed up. My immediate thought
after reading this was to again attempt to understand the methods
used by Fernando Conde Torrens in his similar (if not identical claim). Unfortunately
I dont read spanish. He may or may not have used stylometrics in his
analysis ... it would be interesting to know.

If he has not done so, then of course, it would be good to test this
same hypothesis (Torrens claims Eusebius/Constantine wrote the New
Testament) on the writings: New Testament, Ecclesiastical History, In
Preparation of the Gospels, Life of Constantine, and all christian authors
who, in accordance to the mainstream theory of christian history (ie:
the Eusebian chronology) wrote literature between 0 and 300.

Origen's literature might be the place to start. Then Tertullion and
all others listed out as Authors of Antiquity

The results of these might then be compared to the existent results
based on an analysis of the Historia Augusta.

Thanks and best wishes,

Pete Brown

mountainman · 10-17-2006, 04:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clivedurdle

This is probably in the wrong thread, but p 181 following of Terry Jones Barbarians (or via: amazon.co.uk) states:

Shapur....proclaimed freedom of worship for Manichaens, Jews and Christians....There now even appeared a Christian bishop of Ctesiphon

http://www.fsmitha.com/h1/ch22.htm
( I am discussing Shapur I )[indent]A Christian bishop, Papa bar Aggai, at the capital, Ctesiphon, claimed patriarchal rights - as had the Bishop of Rome - and the bishop of Ctesiphon remained in rivalry for influence with the Christian leadership in Nisibis.

Thanks to the (quite relevant) reference to Mani CLivedurdle,
and to the barbarian references of the author.

In order to maintain a consistency in the hypothesis our view of Mani
is reasonably simple. He existed, much like Apollonius of Tyana, and
was a philosopher-sage who journeyed between large geographical
regions, and who enjoyed some form of communion with the people
in power through many regions.

However, with effect from the rule of Constantine's propaganda, he
like many other figures of history (and fiction also) were made to
appear as if they either were themselves, or had some knowledge
of, or some comment about, this new and strange Roman religion
called "christianity".

My thesis is that archeological, carbon-dating and other scientific
evidence will increasingly support the hypothesis that there was
indeed absolutely nothing "christian" in the pre-Nicaean epoch,
but rather a continuity of a richness of diverse culture (Graeco-
Egyptian, Persian, Indian - see the Buddhist influence thread).

The appearance of the phenomenom of christianity in the archeological
record will be found to have a sharp, violent, dictatorial boundary
clearly demarked by the Council of Nicaea in 325 CE, at which time
it first appeared in antiquity.

Pete Brown
Authors of Antiquity

countjulian · 10-17-2006, 06:01 PM

As your source says, Peter

Quote:

The fact that there seem to be two groups is interesting, because the four first authors lived during the reign of Diocletian, who persecuted the Christians, whereas Pollio and Vopiscus lived during the reign of the first Christian ruler of the Roman empire. Now the work appears to be written by people who shared a common outlook on the past, and agreed to the values of the pagan senatorial aristocracy of Rome. We would love to know whether the two teams knew each other, or whether the second team was working for or against Constantine.....

It can certainly not be excluded that the Historia Augusta was in fact composed during the reign of Julianus Apostata (361-363), who briefly attempted to revive paganism. The text may have been part of an attempt to deduce from the splendor of Roman history that the pagan traditionalists were right, and Christianity was, from an historical point of view, an unRoman activity.

Histories were read by the Romans as you or I read novels. The invention of the Historia Augusta as a charming set of psuedo-biographies endorsing traditional Roman values was the next logical step.

mountainman · 11-06-2006, 03:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by countjulian

Histories were read by the Romans as you or I read novels. The invention of the Historia Augusta as a charming set of psuedo-biographies endorsing traditional Roman values was the next logical step.

My thesis is that Constantine took exception to the prevailing
sentiments in the fourth century Roman empire, and became
progressively dictatorial and irresponsible as his absolute power
went to his head, and manifest in new structures and systems
which were created under his rule.

These prevailing sentiments would appear to be embodied in the
indisputable historical existence of "The Second Sophistic", and
the genre of writings that had persisted since the first century
BCE associated with a revival and renewed expression of what
we now call neo-pythagoreanism and neo-platonism.

These prevailing sentiments are arguably best represented in the
embodiment of two authors in this same period of antiquity (0-300)
in which the mainstream B&C historians would have us believe there
were in addition, a parallel stream of evolving christian thought.

These two authors are Philostratus and Apollonius.
Both these authors are hammered by Eusebius,
and at the same time advertising Constantine's
propaganda, leading to the end result.

Pete Brown
Did Constantine Created Christianity?

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

10-15-2006, 07:54 PM	#2
God Fearing Atheist Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2000 Location: Massachusetts, USA -- Let's Go Red Sox! Posts: 1,500	:banghead:

10-16-2006, 11:14 AM	#4
andrewcriddle Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Birmingham UK Posts: 4,876	The Historia Augusta is generally supposed to have discreet anti-Christian satirical touches. Eusebius would not have approved. Andrew Criddle

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.