Freethought & Rationalism Archive

stephan huller · 03-13-2012, 10:35 PM

Many people at this forum believe that Medieval sources cannot be taken seriously. The most extreme want to carbon date documents and assign the origin to the date of transcribed text. Yet I thought it might be interesting to see how Severus of Al'Ashmunein (c. 10th century) preserves a section of text from Eusebius's Church History Book Six to examine what to expect with other sources he employed but are now lost. Severus never tells us where he is getting his information from. He merely writes:

Quote:

Among the holy men of this time was Serapion also, who was patriarch of Antioch; and when he died Asclepiades, the confessor, was appointed, and his degree was exalted. And Alexander wrote to the people of Antioch with regard to Asclepiades, saying thus :

«Alexander, the servant of God, and believer in Jesus Christ, addresses the holy church in Antioch, in the Lord, with joy, by the hand of the chaste priest Clement. My brethren, I desire that you promote Asclepiades, who is worthy of that post.»

So he was ordained to the see. Serapion also wrote to the people of Antioch a letter, in which he said that a Jew, named Marcian, had written books, which he attributed to Peter, the chief of the apostles, and in which the writer spoke lies,

«Beware, therefore,» continued Serapion, «of these writings. We receive Peter and the rest of the disciples, as we receive the commands of Christ, because they saw him and heard his words. But these lying books we do not accept, but reject them, because they contain nothing of the doctrine of our fathers.»

Now when the priest arrived at Antioch with the letters, he said to them :

«Be confirmed in the true faith, and do not turn aside to the spurious writings attributed to Peter, for they are false and delusive, and in them is the beginning of heresy; and for this reason I am come to you in haste, for we have learnt that this Marcian, the Jew, has led multitudes astray by his books, so that they have become heretics.» For this heretic wrote many books, and the history from which we are quoting contains an account of some of them. But because it would make our narrative too long, I think it needless to write down their names.

Eusebius, his original source reads:

Quote:

These things took place in this manner. But, on the death of Serapion, Asclepiades, who had been himself distinguished among the confessors during the persecution, succeeded to the episcopate of the church at Antioch. Alexander alludes to his appointment, writing thus to the church at Antioch:

"Alexander, a servant and prisoner of Jesus Christ, to the blessed church of Antioch, greeting in the Lord. The Lord has made my bonds during the time of my imprisonment light and easy, since I learned that, by the Divine Providence, Asclepiades, who in regard to the true faith is eminently qualified, has undertaken the bishopric of your holy church at Antioch.

He indicates that he sent this epistle by Clement, writing toward its close as follows:

My honored brethren, I have sent this letter to you by Clement, the blessed presbyter, a man virtuous and approved, whom you yourselves also know and will recognize. Being here, in the providence and oversight of the Master, he has strengthened and built up the Church of the Lord.

It is probable that others have preserved other memorials of Serapion's literary industry, but there have reached us only those addressed to a certain Domninus, who, in the time of persecution, fell away from faith in Christ to the Jewish will-worship; and those addressed to Pontius and Caricus, ecclesiastical men, and other letters to different persons, and still another work composed by him on the so-called Gospel of Peter.

He wrote this last to refute the falsehoods which that Gospel contained, on account of some in the parish of Rhossus who had been led astray by it into heterodox notions. It may be well to give some brief extracts from his work, showing his opinion of the book. He writes as follows:

For we, brethren, receive both Peter and the other apostles as Christ; but we reject intelligently the writings falsely ascribed to them, knowing that such were not handed down to us. When I visited you I supposed that all of you held the true faith, and as I had not read the Gospel which they put forward under the name of Peter, I said, If this is the only thing which occasions dispute among you, let it be read. But now having learned, from what has been told me, that their mind was involved in some heresy, I will hasten to come to you again. Therefore, brethren, expect me shortly. But you will learn, brethren, from what has been written to you, that we perceived the nature of the heresy of Marcianus, and that, not understanding what he was saying, he contradicted himself. For having obtained this Gospel from others who had studied it diligently, namely, from the successors of those who first used it, whom we call Docetæ; (for most of their opinions are connected with the teaching of that school ) we have been able to read it through, and we find many things in accordance with the true doctrine of the Saviour, but some things added to that doctrine, which we have pointed out for you farther on. So much in regard to Serapion

.

Sheshbazzar · 03-13-2012, 11:09 PM

So Stephan, what do you make of this?

stephan huller · 03-13-2012, 11:28 PM

I think it demonstrates that:

(a) the medieval Coptic historians were using ancient sources even when they didn't acknowledge what those sources were
(b) that they were pretty faithful to the original material, condensing them, polishing off the corners etc.

Overall I think it is pretty impressive. The scribes weren't creating digital scans of the original material but it shows that they weren't inventing the important stuff out of thin air either. I think based on this example we can use the medieval texts as long as we are cautious.

tanya · 03-14-2012, 02:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

I think it demonstrates that:

(a) the medieval Coptic historians were using ancient sources even when they didn't acknowledge what those sources were
(b) that they were pretty faithful to the original material, condensing them, polishing off the corners etc.

Overall I think it is pretty impressive. The scribes weren't creating digital scans of the original material but it shows that they weren't inventing the important stuff out of thin air either. I think based on this example we can use the medieval texts as long as we are cautious.

(1) How do we ascertain whether or not the "original material" was simply invented "out of thin air", in the third and fourth century?

(2) If we select an issue of particular importance, e.g. circumcision, an issue which separates Islam/Judaism from Coptic Christianity, how does Severus of Al'Ashmunein describe the historical process of accepting the heathen practice, as becoming theologically virtuous, (as the Christian church had done, by the fourth century,) but which had been repudiated by the bulk of the Egyptian population, living under Islamic rule by the tenth century?

stephan huller · 03-14-2012, 07:54 AM

Quote:

1. How do we ascertain whether or not the "original material" was simply invented "out of thin air", in the third and fourth century?

There's no reason to believe that humanity because more or less faithful or creative. I would suspect that the pattern I just demonstrated extends back in time too. The difference between Severus and Eusebius is two or three times as great as Eusebius to the events he was reporting. What's more - Christians of the fourth century had greater access to the sources. It would have been harder for Eusebius to 'make up' things.

Quote:

2 ... circumcision, an issue which separates Islam/Judaism from Coptic Christianity,

Interestingly all Egyptians accept female circumcision. You are welcomed to determine that yourself. It's online at Roger's website.

andrewcriddle · 03-14-2012, 02:17 PM

Severus seems to believe that Marcian (Marcion) was regarded by Serapion as the author of the Gospel of Peter.

If so, this seems to be a misunderstanding of Eusebius.

Andrew Criddle

stephan huller · 03-14-2012, 02:29 PM

Yes I noted that with my color coding. But I think that it is still pretty impressive that the embellishments aren't more serious.

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

03-13-2012, 11:09 PM	#2
Sheshbazzar Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: On the path of knowledge Posts: 8,889	So Stephan, what do you make of this?

03-13-2012, 11:28 PM	#3
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	I think it demonstrates that: (a) the medieval Coptic historians were using ancient sources even when they didn't acknowledge what those sources were (b) that they were pretty faithful to the original material, condensing them, polishing off the corners etc. Overall I think it is pretty impressive. The scribes weren't creating digital scans of the original material but it shows that they weren't inventing the important stuff out of thin air either. I think based on this example we can use the medieval texts as long as we are cautious.

03-14-2012, 02:17 PM	#6
andrewcriddle Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Birmingham UK Posts: 4,876	Severus seems to believe that Marcian (Marcion) was regarded by Serapion as the author of the Gospel of Peter. If so, this seems to be a misunderstanding of Eusebius. Andrew Criddle

03-14-2012, 02:29 PM	#7
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	Yes I noted that with my color coding. But I think that it is still pretty impressive that the embellishments aren't more serious.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.