Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Clivedurdle · 07-05-2009, 02:17 AM

Little comment in Michael Wood In Search of the Dark Ages (or via: amazon.co.uk) p133 about Alfred the Great and the books he translated.

Quote:

There was a work of history written by a Spanish priest Orosius in order to explain the fall of the Roman empire which early Christians had believed was founded, in the divine scheme of things, to propagate Christianity and usher in the millennium.

Huon · 07-05-2009, 06:47 AM

You could look at wiki for Orosius. There is a short description of his historical work. The french page is more detailed. It gives the criticism of Orosius's history by Augustine. I could translate this excerpt if you want. The spanish page is still longer.

Toto · 07-05-2009, 08:21 AM

new advent has a different spin:

Quote:

Orosius went back to Africa and at St. Augustine's suggestion wrote the first Christian Universal History: "Historiarum adversus paganos libri septem" (P.L. XXXI, 663-1174; ed. Zangemeister, in "Corpus script. eccl. lat.", V, Vienna, 1882), thought to be a supplement to the "Civitas Dei", especially the third book, in which St. Augustine proves that the Roman Empire suffered as many calamities before as after Christianity was received, combating the pagan argument, that the abandonment of their deities had led to calamity. St. Augustine wished to have this proof developed in a special work through the whole period of human history of all the known peoples of antiquity, with the fundamental idea that God determines the destinies of nations. According to his view, two chief empires had governed the world: Babylon in the East, and Rome in the West. Rome received the heritage of Babylon through the intermediate Macedonian and Carthaginian Empires. Thus he holds that there were four great empires in history — a view widely accepted in the Middle Ages. The first book briefly describes the globe, and traces its history from the Deluge to the founding of Rome; the second gives the history of Rome to the sack of the city by the Gauls, that of Persia to Cyrus, and of Greece to the Battle of Cunaxa; the third deals chiefly with the Macedonian Empire under Alexander and his successors, as well as the contemporary Roman history; the fourth brings the history of Rome to the destruction of Carthage; the last three books treat Roman history alone, from the destruction of Carthage to the author's own time. The work, completed in 418, shows signs of some haste. Besides Holy Scripture and the chronicle of Eusebius revised by St. Jerome, Livy, Eutropius, Caesar, Suetonius, Florus, and Justin are used as sources. In pursuance of the apologetic aim, all the calamities suffered by the various peoples are described. Thought superficial and fragmentary, the work is valuable; it contains contemporary information on the period after A.D. 378. It was used largely during the Middle Ages as a compendium, and nearly 200 manuscript copies are still extant. Alfred the Great translated it into Anglo-Saxon (ed. H. Sweet, London, 1843).

Huon · 07-05-2009, 10:20 AM

Orosius is quoted by Edward Gibbon, Chapter XXXI if I am not mistaken.

Another amusing quote :
Orosius writes that after the death of Jesus-Christ, the emperor Tiberius made a proposal to the Senate so that JC would be added to the list of the gods ; but Sejan had stubbornly refused this proposal, and the Senate followed his refusal. Now, Sejan was put to death by an order of Tiberius, on october 18 of the year 31, and as a consequence, the death of the Saviour happened before this date.

The explanation is that Orosius (Hist., l. VII, ch. IV) copied a text of Tertullian (Apologetics, ch. V) containing a mistake of the copyist.

Tertullian (Apologetics, ch. V) : Tiberius ergo, cujus tempore nomen christianum in sæculum introivit., annuntiatum sibi ex Syria Palæstina quod illie veritatem illius divinitatis revelaverat detulit ad senatum cum prærogativa suffragii sui. Senatus, quia non ipse (read in se) probaverat, respuit ; Caesar in sententiam mansit, comminatus periculum accusatoribus christianorum.

Orosius (Hist., l. VII, ch. IV) : Postquam pansus est Dominus..... Pilatus ad Tiberium atque ad senatum retulit de passione et resurrectione Christi consequentibusque virtutibus..... Tiberius cum suffragio magni favoris retulit ad Senatum ut Christus deus haberetur. Senatus, indignatione motus quod non sibi prius secundum morem delatum esset ut de suscipiendo cultu prius ipse decerneret, consecrationem Christi recusavit edictoque constituit exterminandos esse Urbe Christianas, præcipue cum et Sejanus praefectus Tiberii suscipiendæ religioni obstinatissime contradiceret. Tiberius tamen edictu accusatoribus Christianorum mortem comminatus est. Itaque paulatim immutata est illa Tiberii Cæsaris laudatissima modestia in pœnam contradictoris senatus..... atque ex mansuetissimo principe sævissima bestia exarsit..... etc.

Note that the "christiani" in 31 CE is ridiculous.

Clivedurdle · 07-06-2009, 11:41 AM

So the game of trying to explain why things have not worked out as they ought according to a holy book and then having arguments about those explanations is very ancient?

The history of BCH?

Huon · 07-06-2009, 01:51 PM

God, and his authorized fathers (mullahs) of the Church, are not responsible for the misunderstanding(s) of a believer, especially when his intentions are good.

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

07-05-2009, 06:47 AM	#2
Huon Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Bordeaux France Posts: 2,796	You could look at wiki for Orosius. There is a short description of his historical work. The french page is more detailed. It gives the criticism of Orosius's history by Augustine. I could translate this excerpt if you want. The spanish page is still longer.

07-05-2009, 10:20 AM	#4
Huon Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Bordeaux France Posts: 2,796	Orosius is quoted by Edward Gibbon, Chapter XXXI if I am not mistaken. Another amusing quote : Orosius writes that after the death of Jesus-Christ, the emperor Tiberius made a proposal to the Senate so that JC would be added to the list of the gods ; but Sejan had stubbornly refused this proposal, and the Senate followed his refusal. Now, Sejan was put to death by an order of Tiberius, on october 18 of the year 31, and as a consequence, the death of the Saviour happened before this date. The explanation is that Orosius (Hist., l. VII, ch. IV) copied a text of Tertullian (Apologetics, ch. V) containing a mistake of the copyist. Tertullian (Apologetics, ch. V) : Tiberius ergo, cujus tempore nomen christianum in sæculum introivit., annuntiatum sibi ex Syria Palæstina quod illie veritatem illius divinitatis revelaverat detulit ad senatum cum prærogativa suffragii sui. Senatus, quia non ipse (read in se) probaverat, respuit ; Caesar in sententiam mansit, comminatus periculum accusatoribus christianorum. Orosius (Hist., l. VII, ch. IV) : Postquam pansus est Dominus..... Pilatus ad Tiberium atque ad senatum retulit de passione et resurrectione Christi consequentibusque virtutibus..... Tiberius cum suffragio magni favoris retulit ad Senatum ut Christus deus haberetur. Senatus, indignatione motus quod non sibi prius secundum morem delatum esset ut de suscipiendo cultu prius ipse decerneret, consecrationem Christi recusavit edictoque constituit exterminandos esse Urbe Christianas, præcipue cum et Sejanus praefectus Tiberii suscipiendæ religioni obstinatissime contradiceret. Tiberius tamen edictu accusatoribus Christianorum mortem comminatus est. Itaque paulatim immutata est illa Tiberii Cæsaris laudatissima modestia in pœnam contradictoris senatus..... atque ex mansuetissimo principe sævissima bestia exarsit..... etc. Note that the "christiani" in 31 CE is ridiculous.

07-06-2009, 11:41 AM	#5
Clivedurdle Contributor Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: London UK Posts: 16,024	So the game of trying to explain why things have not worked out as they ought according to a holy book and then having arguments about those explanations is very ancient? The history of BCH?

07-06-2009, 01:51 PM	#6
Huon Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Bordeaux France Posts: 2,796	God, and his authorized fathers (mullahs) of the Church, are not responsible for the misunderstanding(s) of a believer, especially when his intentions are good.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.