stephan huller

Just one random observation before I go to bed. The same Latinism found in the Gospel of Mark Ηρωδιανοι is found in Justin Martyr's Dialogue chapter 35. We read there a reference to the Μαρκιανοι. The same construction which is argued by Harnack to be a mistake for Marcionites. I don't think so neither did Hilgenfeld. It is a parallel construction to what appears in Mark 3:6; 12:13

stephan huller

The reference to Μαρκιανοι in Dialogue 35 is actually coupled by a number of similar constructions for other heretical groups - i.e. Ουαλεντινιανοι, Βασιλιδιανοι, Σατορνιλιανοι etc.

http://books.google.com/books?id=4Vp...%CE%B9&f=false

It is unusual that all the other heretical groups retain their Latinized form except for Μαρκιανοι. Can we argue that there was one original Latinized Greek source which later corrected original reference to the Μαρκιανοι in the more usual Greek form - i.e. either Μαρκιανισταὶ (Eusebius Eccl Hst 4.11) ό Μαρκιανός in the work of Serapion of Antioch cited in Eusebius HE 6.12, Epiphanius Panarion 34 etc, Μαρκιωνισταὶ (Martyrdom of Polycarp 22.2-3 Moscow (m), Origen Comm. Psalms, Athanasius Epistula ad Alelphium, Athanasius Orationes contra Arianos, John Chrysostom In epistulam ad Ephesios (homiliae 124), Epiphanius Panarion etc.) but consistently uses ἀπὸ Μαρκίωνος (Clement of Alexandria Stromat. 2.8, 3.3 (x4), 3.4, 7.17, cf. Origen 2.27, Comm Rom 4:23 - 25).

stephan huller

Yet if you look at all the later heretical literature the Latinized Greek formations continue and perpetuate throughout the ages. Example Ουαλεντινιανοι

Clement of Alexandria:

http://books.google.com/books?id=gKI...%CE%B9&f=false

Eusebius:

http://books.google.com/books?id=4Vp...%CE%B9&f=false

Epiphanius:

http://books.google.com/books?id=XoR...%CE%B9&f=false

If you look at the Eusebius reference it is apparent that all the original heretical references are left in the form found in Mark with respect to the Ηρωδιανοι EXCEPT for the Μαρκιανοι. This was changed into the more appropriate form in Greek as if a later editor went out of his way to distinguish them from the original meaning 'those of Mark.' I think this is very significant. There seems to have been an original 'heresiologist' who wrote in a Latinized form of Greek (as what is found in Mark) and who established the names of the heresies in this fashion. Then in a subsequent age the form Μαρκιανοι was corrected to read 'Marcionite' as if the original association with Mark was no longer desirable or necessary.

Look at the list in Hegesippus cited by Eusebius for example with respect to the 'Carpocratians'

Αρχεται δ ο Θεβουθις δια το μη γενεσθαι αυτον επισκοπον υποφθειρειν. απο των επτα αιρεσεων και αυτος ην εν τω λαω, αφ ων Σιμων, οθεν οι Σιμωνιανοι, και Κλεοβιος, οθεν Κλεοβιηνοι, και Δοσιθεος, οθεν Δοσιθιανοι, και Γορθαιος, οθεν Γορθηωνοι, και Μασβωθεος, οθεν Μασβωθαιοι. απο τουτων Μενανδριανισται, και Μαρκιωνισται, και Καρποκρατιανοι, και Ουαλεντινιανοι, και Βασιλειδιανοι, και Σατορνιλιανοι, εκαστος ιδιως και ετερως ιδιαν δοξαν παρεισηγαγησαν.

Origen cites the name of the 'Harpocratians' from Celsus as καὶ Ἁρποκρατιανοὺς

stephan huller

Just to reinforce Ηρωδιανοι is a Latinism with its ιανοι ending. The form we would naturally expect in Greek would be Ηρωδειοι. Some other examples of names appearing in two forms 'Essene' is Εσσαιοι or Εσσενοί. I think Nazarene also appears in two forms.

stephan huller

It seems Epiphanius has a list from somewhere which draws on the Latinized names - i.e. Σιμωνιανοι,· Μενανδριανοι (in Hegesippus in Eusebius Μενανδριανισται ), Σατορνιλιανοϊ

http://books.google.com/books?id=XoR...%CE%B9&f=false

So too Timotheus -

http://books.google.com/books?id=9r8...%CE%B9&f=false

stephan huller

The Σιμωνιανοί form for 'those of Simon' is near universal. It appears in Justin and continues through almost all sources

http://books.google.com/books?id=1VS...%CE%AF&f=false

Origen

http://books.google.com/books?id=1VS...%CE%AF&f=false

Let's not forget that 'Christians' (χριστιανοί) is another Latinism

stephan huller

[THREAD="hdxgdhhdvccashcdv"][/THREAD]wolvbenjaminccvccvcccbcccccccccccccccccccccccccccc cccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccc cccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccc cccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccc cccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccc cccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccc cccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccc cccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccc cccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccc cccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccc cccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccc ccccccccccccccccccccccccccnbnbnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnncccccccccccc cccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccc cccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccc cccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccc cccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccc cccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccc cccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccc cccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccc ccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccc

Toto

Gotta watch those 5 year olds around the keyboard.

stephan huller

It is curious χριστιανοί an obvious Latinism appears in Acts. What if the Marcionites did not so identify themselves? More significantly the suffix is almost never used with gods. In the Latin model the names ending in –ιανός with the meaning 'the followers or adherents of someone.' This seems again deliberately aimed at the Christians who held that Jesus was a god. One wouldn't use χριστιανοί as a designation which meant 'believer in Jesus' if Jesus wasn't understood to be a person. Either one believed that one was a follower of a human being who was Christ (and Jesus a god) or it was imposed on Christians by Romans to define their religion and the identity of Jesus as human (rather than divine). Other examples of sects being so named in Greek - Σαβελλιανοί, Σαββατιανοί, Μελιτιανοί, Μακεδονιανοί etc

stephan huller

The usual way of explaining this is to limit the discussion to either the 'Herodianoi' or 'Christianoi' or 'Caesarianoi' and somehow see the Christian usage as a natural outgrowth of Greek in Rome or Italy. I think the evidence from the identification of the various sects with this suffix is hard to account by 'natural usage.' There is something else behind this.

The use of ιανοί is unlikely to be shared by 'the early Christians.' It can't be that Mark happened to call the Herodians - Ηρωδιανοι and then Justin referenced certain Christian groups with the ιανοι suffix and then Hegesippus did the same thing with other groups and so on and so on. I think a far more likely scenario is that the terminology is reflective of a particularly influential Christian who either lived in Rome or spoke a particularly unique form of Greek (or Latin - cf. the studies of the Latin of Irenaeus).

Scholars will argue that Caesarianoi is like Christianoi but that's only true if we believe that Christian terminology began in Latin. But what of the various heretical groups - the Markianoi, the Valentinianoi, the Carpocratianoi etc?