Freethought & Rationalism Archive

arnoldo · 01-10-2009, 05:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

Dear BC&H researchers,

How I lament that the search for the historical jesus has gone so badly over the last century. We have no results to show other than academic summit meetings over the HJ. Might I be so bold as to suggest we lower our sights somewhat and approach as an exemplary exercise the task of assigning an index of ancient historicity to the two "universal church" figures who go by the names of (Saints) Cosmas and Damien?

Here a starting point (WIKI):

Quote:

Saints Cosmas and Damian (Greek: Κοσμάς και Δαμιανός) (died ca. 287) were twins and early Christian martyrs born in Arabia who practised the art of healing in the seaport of Aegea (modern Ayas) in the Gulf of Issus, then in the Roman province of Syria.[1] They accepted no payment for their services, which led them to be nicknamed anargyroi (The Silverless); it is said that by this, they led many to the Catholic faith.

The task, if you are prepared to accept it, is to attempt to establish the historicity (or otherwise) of these two purported historical figures. This pair of either reliable hard working physicians were either alive and active from the third century, or they were not. In comparison to the monumental task of seeking a value of ancient historicity for the historical jesus figure, the task of performing exactly the same assessment for these two Cosmas and Damien should be an easier task, since they are from a later century.

At one end of the historicity scale, if Cosmas and Damien existed, what evidence is available to substantiate this existence, and of what character is the evidence? What monumental and epigraphic evidence exists, etc? At the other end of the historicity scale, what evidence suggests that these two purported historical figures are the literary inventions of a later century, who in fact did not exist at all in the third century?

My claim is that this exercise will highlight certain features of the quest for the historical (or otherwise) jesus. Does anyone disagree with the claim? Does anyone have anything to say on the principle of the exercise?

Best wishes,

Pete

A picture is worth a thousands words, no?

Image: Not Safe for Work

St. Ambrose and on his left, towards you, probably St. Gervase.
St. Protase is hidden from view on the other side of Ambrose.

Toto · 01-10-2009, 06:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/...pt/Ambrose.jpg

What does this have to do with the thread? Please explain or I will remove it.

Toto · 01-10-2009, 06:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

...I agree that today they have been relegated to the category "folklore", however you will appreciate that this has not always been the case. Basilicas to this pair of figures were physically constructed, as early as the fourth century. Unless we are examining basilicas in the role of "Disneylands" those who constructed these buildings -- it would be a reasonable position to claim - actually believed that they were dealing with "real historical people" according to the then-present "folklore".

This does not follow. Most of the Catholic saints were part of folklore, for the edifaction and entertainment of the simple European peasants. If you look for a real person behind the legend, you miss the point.

Quote:

... However the question that needs to be clearly asked is this:

If Ambrose "discovered the bones of these "folklore figures" c.389, then did he have access to precedent literature by which he was able to recognise and indentify the most important find.

Thus it seems reasonable to surmise that this "folktale" must have been extant in c.389 CE, but it was not then identified as a "folktale" but as a history.

No, this is not reasonable, and indicates that you don't understand how religion operates.

arnoldo · 01-10-2009, 07:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/...pt/Ambrose.jpg

What does this have to do with the thread? Please explain or I will remove it.

It has to more to do with the following post:

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clivedurdle

Is not Ambrose wanting to be buried next to them the same as Edward wanting to be buried at Glastonbury next to Arthur's Grave - which was dug up complete with a twelth century inscription - here lies Arthur.

Dear Clivedurdle,

Yes it appears to be a burial tradition of the christians which has been invoked since at least the time of Julian's uncle Con.

Best wishes,

Pete

Which indicates that Ambrose wished to be buried next to the two individuals mentioned in the OP. Ambrose is without question a historical figures as noted by his own writings below:

Quote:

To the lady, his sister, dearer to him than his eyes and life, [from] Ambrose [the] bishop.

1. “Since I am accustomed to leave your holiness (sanctitas) in the dark about nothing which happens here in your absence, you should know that we have unearthed saintly martyrs (sancti martyri). For after I had dedicated the basilica (Ambrosiana), many, as it were, with one mouth began to address me, and said: Consecrate this as you did the Basilica in Romana. And I answered: "Certainly I will if I find any relics of martyrs." And at once a kind of prophetic ardor seemed to enter my heart.

2. Why should I use many words? God favored us, for even the clergy were afraid who were bidden to clear away the earth from the spot before the chancel screen of Sts. Felix and Nabor.
http://urban.hunter.cuny.edu/~thead/gervase.htm

However, as far as Cosmas and Damien their historicity is unclear. For an academic example of an article disproving the historicity of a person perhaps the following article could be a guidline: Amid Rubble and Myth: Excavating Beneath Florence's Cathedral By Franklin Toker

mountainman · 01-10-2009, 09:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

It has to more to do with the following post:
Which indicates that Ambrose wished to be buried next to the two individuals mentioned in the OP. Ambrose is without question a historical figure.

...[]...

However, as far as Cosmas and Damien their historicity is unclear. For an academic example of an article disproving the historicity of a person perhaps the following article could be a guidline: Amid Rubble and Myth: Excavating Beneath Florence's Cathedral By Franklin Toker

Dear arnaldo,

Thanks for this reference regarding St. Reparata. It appears to be a recurring theme of that epoch. I was interested to read in that article the following reference:

Quote:

The invention of St. Reparata was possibly helped along by a Constantinian motto that circulated on coins for centuries. This was felix temporis reparatio -- “happy times are recovered.” A politician of today might render the motto as “let the good old times roll again.” Who could have resisted a saint with political muscle like that?

Additionally, your earlier links indicated that Ambrose was busy:

Quote:

The basic story is simple: St. Ambrose (339‑397), bishop of Milan from 374 until his death, found the bodies of SS. Gervase and Protase, the first Christian martyrs (or "protomartyrs") of the city, on the eve of the dedication of this church. The basilica was consecrated to them for a while, but as the cult of St. Ambrose grew, it was rededicated to him, and in 835 his own body was brought to this crypt under the high altar of what had once been his cathedral church.

So Cosmas and Damian were not alone in the inventions of the fourth century it would appear. A very inventive century. Where will it end?

Best wishes,

Pete

mountainman · 01-10-2009, 09:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

...I agree that today they have been relegated to the category "folklore", however you will appreciate that this has not always been the case. Basilicas to this pair of figures were physically constructed, as early as the fourth century. Unless we are examining basilicas in the role of "Disneylands" those who constructed these buildings -- it would be a reasonable position to claim - actually believed that they were dealing with "real historical people" according to the then-present "folklore".

This does not follow. Most of the Catholic saints were part of folklore, for the edifaction and entertainment of the simple European peasants. If you look for a real person behind the legend, you miss the point.

Dear Toto,

What about the head-honcho catholic saint called Jesus Christ? Are we supposed to be looking for a real person? Is Jesus just another case of Cosmas and Damian on a larger scale? It appears that we can establish that christian folklore figures appear to have been fabricated in the fourth century. We might suspect the person who fabricated them. Are we looking for a fabricator (and a date) of the Jesus christ legend?

Best wishes,

Pete

mountainman · 01-11-2009, 08:15 PM

From Medieval Sourcebook: Hippolyte Delehaye: The Legends of the Saints: An Introduction to Hagiography

The Legends of the Saints: An Introduction to Hagiography (or via: amazon.co.uk)
From the French of Père Hippolyte. Delehaye, S.J., Bollandist
Translated By V. M. Crawford
1907

Quote:

Nevertheless, fictions of this type are not without a certain danger. As long as they continue to be read in the spirit in which they were written, all goes well. But a moment comes, and in some cases comes very quickly, when people no longer recall the original intention of the story. Indeed the classification of literature is not always an easy task, and we can imagine our own great-grandchildren finding themselves much embarrassed by some of our contemporary novels of a vivid and convincing realism. In such cases, however, our ancestors suffered from no hesitations. In their eyes all noble narratives which delighted them were history, and the heroes therein depicted were genuine saints equal in all respects to those who enjoyed traditional honours.

And in relation to Cosmas and Damian ...

Quote:

Whatever may have been the primitive history of SS. Cosmas and Damian they were represented at an early age as the successors of the Dioscuri, and the honours paid to them at certain of their shrines undoubtedly betray points of contact with pre-existing forms of worship.

Best wishes,

Pete

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

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.