Freethought & Rationalism Archive

PhilosopherJay · 08-20-2012, 05:29 AM

Hi all,

What is generally taken as the first non-Christian, historical reference to Christianity, may not be.

Pliny's letters to Trajan describing a massive cult disturbing Roman worship in Bithyia-Pontus makes no sense in its present form referring to Christians. Pliny treats it as an indigenous cult and never mentions any connection to Jerusalem or Judea.

It makes sense if the original references were to the Cybelean cult that flourished in the region for many centuries.

Note this: When Cybele discovered that Attis had been unfaithful to her, she killed the nymph he had been with. Driven to madness, Attis then wounded himself under a pine tree and bled to death. (from Attis - Myth Encyclopedia - god, story, names, ancient, tree, Roman, life http://www.mythencyclopedia.com/Ar-B...#ixzz245UfBEd4)
This explains why an oath was taken by the Cebeleans at every meeting not to commit adultery. There does not seem to be any reason why a Christian would take such an oath, rather than an oath of chastity or an oath not to divorce.

If the references were originally meant to be to the new cult of Christianity, one would expect references to Christian doctrines and practices. They letter takes it as a given that the doctrines and practices are well known, which would only be the case if he was talking about the Cybeleans, which had been known for several centuries in Rome.

In this earlier letter, Pliny writes to Trajan to get a Cybelean Temple removed. So we already have a precedent showing that Cybelean worship was a concern of Pliny. We have no precedent in Pliny's letters that Christianity was a concern.

Quote:

LVIII. To the Emperor Trajan

THE NICOMEDIANS, Sir, before my arrival in this province, had begun to build a new forum adjoining their former, in a corner of which stands an ancient temple dedicated to the mother of the gods. 1 This fabric must either be repaired or removed, and for this reason chiefly, because it is a much lower building than that very lofty one which is now in process of erection. Upon enquiry whether this temple had been consecrated, I was informed that their ceremonies of dedication differ from ours. You will be pleased, therefore, Sir, to consider whether a temple which has not been consecrated according to our rites may be removed, 2 consistently with the reverence due to religion: for, if there should be no objection from that quarter, the removal in every other respect would be extremely convenient.

Here are letters 96-97 substituting Cebelean for Christian and Attis for Christ. Note how much more sense it makes. The Romans were tryinig to incorporate the cult into the Roman religion. This is what they did with foreign cults. That was why it was so important for adherents to worship the Roman Gods and the Emperor along with Cebele.

We may guess at what point a Christian transmitter of the text decided to get creative and make the substitution of "Christian" for "Cybelean." The reason seems fairly obvious, to prove that there had been persecution of Christians in the time of Trajan.

Quote:

PLINY, LETTERS 10.96-97

Pliny to the Emperor Trajan

It is my practice, my lord, to refer to you all matters concerning which I am in doubt. For who can better give guidance to my hesitation or inform my ignorance? I have never participated in trials of Cebeleans. I therefore do not know what offenses it is the practice to punish or investigate, and to what extent. And I have been not a little hesitant as to whether there should be any distinction on account of age or no difference between the very young and the more mature; whether pardon is to be granted for repentance, or, if a man has once been a Cebelean, it does him no good to have ceased to be one; whether the name itself, even without offenses, or only the offenses associated with the name are to be punished.

Meanwhile, in the case of those who were denounced to me as Cebeleans, I have observed the following procedure: I interrogated these as to whether they were Cebeleans; those who confessed I interrogated a second and a third time, threatening them with punishment; those who persisted I ordered executed. For I had no doubt that, whatever the nature of their creed, stubbornness and inflexible obstinacy surely deserve to be punished. There were others possessed of the same folly; but because they were Roman citizens, I signed an order for them to be transferred to Rome.

Soon accusations spread, as usually happens, because of the proceedings going on, and several incidents occurred. An anonymous document was published containing the names of many persons. Those who denied that they were or had been Cebeleans, when they invoked the gods in words dictated by me, offered prayer with incense and wine to your image, which I had ordered to be brought for this purpose together with statues of the gods, and moreover cursed Attis--none of which those who are really Cebeleans, it is said, can be forced to do--these I thought should be discharged. Others named by the informer declared that they were Cebeleans, but then denied it, asserting that they had been but had ceased to be, some three years before, others many years, some as much as twenty-five years. They all worshipped your image and the statues of the gods, and cursed Cebele.

They asserted, however, that the sum and substance of their fault or error had been that they were accustomed to meet on a fixed day before dawn and sing responsively a hymn to Attis as to a god, and to bind themselves by oath, not to some crime, but not to commit fraud, theft, or adultery, not falsify their trust, nor to refuse to return a trust when called upon to do so. When this was over, it was their custom to depart and to assemble again to partake of food--but ordinary and innocent food. Even this, they affirmed, they had ceased to do after my edict by which, in accordance with your instructions, I had forbidden political associations. Accordingly, I judged it all the more necessary to find out what the truth was by torturing two female slaves who were called deaconesses. But I discovered nothing else but depraved, excessive superstition.

I therefore postponed the investigation and hastened to consult you. For the matter seemed to me to warrant consulting you, especially because of the number involved. For many persons of every age, every rank, and also of both sexes are and will be endangered. For the contagion of this superstition has spread not only to the cities but also to the villages and farms. But it seems possible to check and cure it. It is certainly quite clear that the temples, which had been almost deserted, have begun to be frequented, that the established religious rites, long neglected, are being resumed, and that from everywhere sacrificial animals are coming, for which until now very few purchasers could be found. Hence it is easy to imagine what a multitude of people can be reformed if an opportunity for repentance is afforded.
Trajan to Pliny

You observed proper procedure, my dear Pliny, in sifting the cases of those who had been denounced to you as Cebeleans. For it is not possible to lay down any general rule to serve as a kind of fixed standard. They are not to be sought out; if they are denounced and proved guilty, they are to be punished, with this reservation, that whoever denies that he is a Cebelean and really proves it--that is, by worshiping our gods--even though he was under suspicion in the past, shall obtain pardon through repentance. But anonymously posted accusations ought to have no place in any prosecution. For this is both a dangerous kind of precedent and out of keeping with the spirit of our age.

Warmly,

Jay Raskin

ph2ter · 08-20-2012, 07:20 AM

Are you inventing the sect of the Cebeleans?

I think that it is not possible that some Roman official condemns anybody who worships Attis or Cybele - the Roman Magna Mater deorum Idaea.

PhilosopherJay · 08-20-2012, 08:16 AM

Hi All,

It should be added, or perhaps noted that Justin Martyr, writing perhaps 50 years or more later, is unaware of Trajan's important edict concerning the Christians that we find in Pliny's correspondence. Compare the statement Martyr does quote by Hadrian with the statement by Trajan to Pliny:

Quote:

I have received the letter addressed to me by your predecessor Serenius Granianus, a most illustrious man; and this communication I am unwilling to pass over in silence, lest innocent persons be disturbed, and occasion be given to the informers for practising villany. Accordingly, if the inhabitants of your province will so far sustain this petition of theirs as to accuse the Christians in some court of law, I do not prohibit them from doing so. But I will not suffer them to make use of mere entreaties and outcries. For it is far more just, if any one desires to make an accusation, that you give judgment upon it. If, therefore, any one makes the accusation, and furnishes proof that the said men do anything contrary to the laws, you shall adjudge punishments in proportion to the offenses. And this, by Hercules, you shall give special heed to, that if any man shall, through mere calumny, bring an accusation against any of these persons, you shall award to him more severe punishments in proportion to his wickedness.

Quote:

You observed proper procedure, my dear Pliny, in sifting the cases of those who had been denounced to you as Christians. For it is not possible to lay down any general rule to serve as a kind of fixed standard. They are not to be sought out; if they are denounced and proved guilty, they are to be punished, with this reservation, that whoever denies that he is a Christian and really proves it--that is, by worshiping our gods--even though he was under suspicion in the past, shall obtain pardon through repentance. But anonymously posted accusations ought to have no place in any prosecution. For this is both a dangerous kind of precedent and out of keeping with the spirit of our age.

Obviously, it would have been useful for Justin Martyr to cite a letter by Hadrian's predecessor to the effect that anonymous persecutions are not to be permitted. In fact Trajan goes much further than Hadrian. He says that all a person has to do to prove he is not a Christian is worship other gods. He says he can prove he is not a _____ by "worshiping our gods." Trajan does not forbid the worshiping of ______ here. In fact, as long as people "worship our Gods" the person is perfectly free to worship _______ or whoever he pleases. Why would Martyr not publish a proclamation like this by an emperor?

Of course, we can come up with a lame excuse that he did not know about it. However, we would have to wonder why Governor Pliny would have kept this important information from the Christians of his province and why the Christians would not have told other Christians about it.

The most probable reason that Martyr does not mention it is that Trajan never mentioned the Christians in Bithyia in his response. Trajan wrote about the Cebeleans.

I would also like to add the point that there is no reason for Christians to take an oath to not commit "fraud, theft, or adultery, not falsify their trust, nor to refuse to return a trust when called upon to do so."

Christ was not charged with fraud, theft adultery, falsifying a trust and refusing to return a trust. All these things would have been charged against Attis. Cybele gave him the gift of eternal youth in return for his faithfulness. He broke this trust when he committed adultery

Quote:

According to Ovid (Fast. iv. 221), Cybele loved the beautiful shepherd, and made him her own priest on condition that he should preserve his chastity inviolate. Atys broke the covenant with a nymph, the daughter of the river-god Sangarius, and was thrown by the goddess into a state of madness, in which he unmanned himself. When in consequence he wanted to put an end to his life, Cybele changed him into a firtree, which henceforth became sacred to her, and she commanded that, in future, her priests should be eunuchs.

The facts of the location and the oaths being more likely Cebelean and the silence of early Christians about his text should count heavily towards this being another Christian revision/forgery of history.

Warmly,

Jay Raskin

PhilosopherJay · 08-20-2012, 08:19 AM

Hi ph2ter,

The worship of Cebele would be fine, but a strict Cebele cult that did not worship the other Roman Gods, worshipped Attis and supported castration would be considered excessive superstition.

Warmly,

Jay Raskin

Quote:

Originally Posted by ph2ter

Are you inventing the sect of the Cebeleans?

I think that it is not possible that some Roman official condemns anybody who worships Attis or Cybele - the Roman Magna Mater deorum Idaea.

aa5874 · 08-20-2012, 09:39 AM

There is absolutely no need to insert words into the the Pliny letters. The writings MUST, MUST, MUST be left UNALTERED. It is unheard of that anyone reviewing WRITTEN statements ALTER them.

It is NOT allowed to TAMPER with the Evidence. There is NOTHING about Cybele in the Pliny letter to Trajan about the "Christians"

The Letter about "Christians" did NOT show any connection between a character called Jesus and those before Pliny.

Pliny himself did NOT what the supposed Christians believed.

Pliny was a LAWYER and MAGISTRATE in ROME before he went to Bithynia and did NOT know anything about a JESUS cult.

It is wholly illogical for HJers to ASSUME that Christus in the Pliny letter refers to Jesus when HJers themselves ARGUE that there were probably MANY Messianic claimants and the very NT claimed that Many DECEIVERS would come under the name of Christus.

Also, based on Theophilus of Antioch, Athenagoras and Justin Martyr it is claimed and shown that there were CHRISTIANS who BELIEVED ONLY in GOD--NOT JESUS.

BELIEF IN GOD PREDATE the Jesus story.

There were people in the 2nd century called Christians who were NOT of the Jesus cult.

andrewcriddle · 08-20-2012, 01:05 PM

Do we have any evidence of a group that worshipped Cybele to the exclusion of all other Gods ?

Andrew Criddle

PhilosopherJay · 08-20-2012, 07:10 PM

Hi Andrew,

That is a terrific question.

I haven't been able to find an answer to it yet. However, this suggests that it might not be the real question here.

According to Encyclopedia of the Roman Empire, Bunson, Facts On File, 1994, p. 121, “Cybele”:

This suggests that only certain aspects of the Cebelean cult practices was what was forbidden.

In thinking about the text, it does not seem that the followers of Cybele are actually opposed to worshiping other Gods.

Quote:

invoked the gods in words dictated by me, offered prayer with incense and wine to your image, which I had ordered to be brought for this purpose together with statues of the gods, and moreover cursed Attis--none of which those who are really ________, it is said, can be forced to do

According to the text, there are only three things that a Cebelean can't be forced to do:

1. invoke the gods in words dictated by a Roman
2. offer prayers with incense and wine to the Emperor's image
3. Curse Attis.

The first one suggests that the problem isn't that they don't worship the Roman Gods, but that they don't do it in the prescribed way of the Imperial Religion of Rome. The second test is showing proper loyalty to the emperor. The first two tests would be to show loyalty to the Roman State. The third would be to show that they are not part of the castration cult of Attis. Pliny and Trajan would not care if they worshipped other Gods. The worship of other Gods by the Cebeleans would be assumed. The question would be if they worshipped them in the Roman way (by "words dictated by me"). The second question would be if they were loyal to the emperor and the third question is if they will denounce Attis who started the castration cult.

Trajan's response seems to limit this inquiry further. He says, "really proves it--that is, by worshiping our gods" He leaves out the prayers and the wine to the emperor and cursing Attis. For Trajan just worshiping our Gods in the proper Roman way is what is most important. If they deny that they are Cebeleans and do that, they are in the clear.

Thus not worshiping other Gods is not the question. Worshiping other Gods in the Roman way is the question.

Warmly,

Jay Raskin

P.S. Note this from Wikipedia:

Quote:

Others demonstrate the peculiar role and status of the Galli in Rome's social and religious life, and suggest reasons for the near complete omission of Attis in early literary references to Cybele's cult. While the various Greek and Phrygian cults to the goddess and her consort seem to have been open to all, Rome observed its own traditional proprieties. For the duration of the goddess' festivals, her temple was opened to the public. Ordinary citizens might observe her procession (pompa), but no more than that; as citizens, they could not participate in the goddess' mysteries. The upper classes who sponsored her festivals delegated their organisation to the plebeian aediles. In the goddess' honour they staged lavish, private festival banquets, at which her distinctive eunuch priests were conspicuously absent.

Quote:

Originally Posted by andrewcriddle

Do we have any evidence of a group that worshipped Cybele to the exclusion of all other Gods ?

Andrew Criddle

ph2ter · 08-20-2012, 11:40 PM

I advise you to abandon the proposal, because it was absolutely impossible that any Roman official asked anyone to give up or curse Cybele or Attis.

The castration cult does not appear in the Pliny's letters and is not under the question. Castration was common to many eastern cults starting already from Sumerian gala priests, Babylonian kalu priests, the priests of Atargatis in Ashkelon and in Syria, the priests of Cybele and also in Scythia lived many eunuchs who were called Enarees. The castration cult was so spread that I doubt that the Roman state could stop this practice.

PhilosopherJay · 08-21-2012, 06:13 AM

Hi ph2ter,

You may be right, but we have to consider the matter carefully and look for the best evidence. We have to examine the specific historical conditions of the time of Trajan. It is also important to distinguish between the Cebelean cult and the Attis/castration Cult.

from History of Civilization: Section 12 Roman Cults and Worship

Quote:

The rites of Cybele revolved around not only the goddess herself but also a young male consort of hers named Attis who was said to die annually. That is, myth held that he perished each fall and was reborn each spring, an obvious reflection of vegetation. The way his renewal and return was celebrated every year involved much lamentation and also wild behavior, ecstasy to put it technically—ecstasis in Greek means literally "standing outside (oneself)," in other words, the transportation of a person out of his or her body which allows spirits to possess it, much the same way mediums at séances act today—worse yet, during her rites, Cybele worshipers became "ecstatic" by dancing and carousing, whipping themselves into a frenzy where they felt elated, in Latin "carried away." And this sometimes involved scanty clothing and mixed company.

A traditionally conservative people, most Romans took a dim view of such behavior. The Roman Senate was repulsed enough at this behavior to issue edicts condemning and criminalizing its "bacchanals."

Catallus' poem "Attis" shows that the general Roman population considered the castration aspect of the cult to be madness. We have to find out exactly what Trajan thought of it. Did he consider it madness, a threat that had to be suppressed or was he okay with it Claudius and later emperors appear to have been.

Incidentally, Pliny does mention a temple to the Goddess Cybele that he wanted to move:

Quote:

LVIII

To the Emperor Trajan

The Nicomedians, Sir, before my arrival in this province, had begun to build a new forum adjoining their former, in a corner of which stands an ancient temple dedicated to the mother of the gods.1 This fabric must either be repaired or removed, and for this reason chiefly, because it is a much lower building than that very lofty one which is now in process of erection. Upon enquiry whether this temple had been consecrated, I was informed that their ceremonies of dedication differ from ours. You will be pleased, therefore, Sir, to consider whether a temple which has not been consecrated according to our rites may be removed,2 consistently with the reverence due to religion: for, if there should be no objection from that quarter, the removal in every other respect would be extremely convenient.

[Footnote 1: Cybele, Rhea, or Ops, as she is otherwise called; from whom, according to the pagan creed, the rest of the gods are supposed to have descended. M.]

[Footnote 2: Whatever was legally consecrated was ever afterwards unapplicable to profane uses. M.]

LIX

Trajan to Pliny

You may without scruple, my dearest Secundus, if the sieuation requires it, remove the temple of the mother of the gods, from the place where it now stands, to any other spot more convenient. You need be under no difficulty with respect to the act of dedication; for the ground of a foreign city3 is not capable of receiving that kind of consecration which is sanctified by our laws.

Warmly,

Jay Raskin

Quote:

Originally Posted by ph2ter

I advise you to abandon the proposal, because it was absolutely impossible that any Roman official asked anyone to give up or curse Cybele or Attis.

The castration cult does not appear in the Pliny's letters and is not under the question. Castration was common to many eastern cults starting already from Sumerian gala priests, Babylonian kalu priests, the priests of Atargatis in Ashkelon and in Syria, the priests of Cybele and also in Scythia lived many eunuchs who were called Enarees. The castration cult was so spread that I doubt that the Roman state could stop this practice.

PhilosopherJay · 08-22-2012, 09:26 AM

Hi All,

I think that I just found the smoking gun that is going to blow the idea that Pliny referred to Jesus Christ out of the water.

This is from Provincial population and Roman identity in Bithynia et Pontus. Jesper Majbom Madsen; klajmm@hum.au.dk; The Danish National Research Foundations Centre for Black Sea Studies; Building 328; University of Aarhus; 8000 Aarhus C; Denmark. Madsen is talking about

Quote:

Also those who remained in Bithynia et Pontus used Roman names of
different types for themselves and their families and were proud to show if they or their families had any active relation to imperial cult or administrative careers in general. That the local elite was eager to show their identity as Roman citizens is especially apparent in Prusias ad Hypium, where members of the local elite are honoured as first archons in a series of phylai inscriptions. It is striking that from Prusias ad Hypium all the archons are presented with tria nomina often with a Greek cognomen e.g. T. Flavius Pomponius Domitianus Timokrates41 or T. Flavius Domitianus Nestor42 except in a single case, where Domitius son of Aster appears as
archon without a tria nomina but with a Latinized name...
A similar example is from Nicaea, where an earlier member of the Cassii family Gaius Cassius Christos behaved in a way, which related him closely to the Roman community in the province. Apart from his tria nomia used in public inscriptions Christos was during the reign of Vespasian or Titus responsible for honouring the Roman governor M. Plancius Varus from Perge on behalf of Nicaea, and later also on own initiative. Christos identified himself as part of the Roman community showing his relation to the governor especially by honouring him on a private initiative. But his Roman identity was further indicated by his engagement in the imperial cult in the city, where he served as archpriest; a status recorded on his
sarcophagus. To the population in Nicaea, Christos was presumably still seen as a man with a solid Greek background, but out of his name and public appearance it was also obvious that Christos did identify himself as Roman and part of the Roman community.

Nicaea was a leading city in Bithynia. Gauis Cassius Christos was the archpriest in charge of teaching the Bithynians to worship in the Roman style. It is clear that he was someone that Pliny and Trajan would have known about. One can well imagine that the followers of the archpriest Christos would be called Christians.
We can well imagine that there must have been some type of tension in how the Archpriest Christos taught Roman worship in Bithynia and how a Roman like Pliny would have wanted it observed.
The Christians who Pliny talks about in his letter to Trajan are the followers of Archpriest Gauis Cassius Christos.
This explains why Pliny does not have to explain anything about Christos or the Christians. Trajan would have known that they were talking about the recent archpriest Christos and his followers.

How can we be sure that these are the Christians that Pliny are talking about and not the followers of Jesus Christ?

We should note the three conditions that Pliny gives for clearing a Christian.

Quote:

Those who denied that they were or had been Christians, when they invoked the gods in words dictated by me, offered prayer with incense and wine to your image, which I had ordered to be brought for this purpose together with statues of the gods, and moreover cursed Christ--none of which those who are really Christians, it is said, can be forced to do--these I thought should be discharged. Others named by the informer declared that they were Christians, but then denied it, asserting that they had been but had ceased to be, some three years before, others many years, some as much as twenty-five years. They all worshipped your image and the statues of the gods, and cursed Christ.

Note that these entail an argument over how the Roman imperial cult should be worshipped.

Warmly,

Jay Raskin

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

08-20-2012, 07:20 AM	#2
ph2ter Regular Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Europe Posts: 219	Are you inventing the sect of the Cebeleans? I think that it is not possible that some Roman official condemns anybody who worships Attis or Cybele - the Roman Magna Mater deorum Idaea.

08-20-2012, 09:39 AM	#5
aa5874 Contributor Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: the fringe of the caribbean Posts: 18,988	There is absolutely no need to insert words into the the Pliny letters. The writings MUST, MUST, MUST be left UNALTERED. It is unheard of that anyone reviewing WRITTEN statements ALTER them. It is NOT allowed to TAMPER with the Evidence. There is NOTHING about Cybele in the Pliny letter to Trajan about the "Christians" The Letter about "Christians" did NOT show any connection between a character called Jesus and those before Pliny. Pliny himself did NOT what the supposed Christians believed. Pliny was a LAWYER and MAGISTRATE in ROME before he went to Bithynia and did NOT know anything about a JESUS cult. It is wholly illogical for HJers to ASSUME that Christus in the Pliny letter refers to Jesus when HJers themselves ARGUE that there were probably MANY Messianic claimants and the very NT claimed that Many DECEIVERS would come under the name of Christus. Also, based on Theophilus of Antioch, Athenagoras and Justin Martyr it is claimed and shown that there were CHRISTIANS who BELIEVED ONLY in GOD--NOT JESUS. BELIEF IN GOD PREDATE the Jesus story. There were people in the 2nd century called Christians who were NOT of the Jesus cult.

08-20-2012, 01:05 PM	#6
andrewcriddle Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Birmingham UK Posts: 4,876	Do we have any evidence of a group that worshipped Cybele to the exclusion of all other Gods ? Andrew Criddle

08-20-2012, 11:40 PM	#8
ph2ter Regular Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Europe Posts: 219	I advise you to abandon the proposal, because it was absolutely impossible that any Roman official asked anyone to give up or curse Cybele or Attis. The castration cult does not appear in the Pliny's letters and is not under the question. Castration was common to many eastern cults starting already from Sumerian gala priests, Babylonian kalu priests, the priests of Atargatis in Ashkelon and in Syria, the priests of Cybele and also in Scythia lived many eunuchs who were called Enarees. The castration cult was so spread that I doubt that the Roman state could stop this practice.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.