Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Chris Weimer · 01-12-2005, 05:11 AM

Lucretius, this is what I suggested about the Josephus interpolation:
http://neonostalgia.com/bible/forums/viewtopic.php?t=57

andrewcriddle · 01-12-2005, 06:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lucretius

Now a true test of whether an interpolation of marginalia exists is to remove those words and the passage still makes sense and in this instance it certainly does. In fact in my opinion, it reads far better with the words "Chrestianos" followed more closely by "Repressaque". So if we put the two parts of this particular sentence back together again we see that no only that they are non Tacitean but they even clash with each other in terms of style if you can say it has a style.

I'm not sure that just deleting that sentence does result in a passage that reads smoothly.

The text in English now seems to say something like

Quote:

Consequently to get rid of the report Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations called Christians by the populace. The deadly superstition, having been checked for the moment was breaking out again, not only in Judea the first source of the evil, but even in Rome where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular.

The second sentence which is IMVHO strongly Tacitean appears to refer back to something (a previous repressive act of some sort) which is (due to the deletion) no longer mentioned in the text.

an additional deletion of 'The deadly superstition....become popular' does result in a smooth text but as I said the deleted pasage does seem if not Tacitean to be a very good imitation.

Andrew Criddle

01-12-2005, 01:43 PM

Thank you to Lucretius for giving us his more considered thoughts. I note that Andrew has already disposed of three of Luc's arguments. The other two are, unfortunately, the most subjective and hence the least convincing. First, you simply cannot tell from just four words that something is schoolboy Latin. It looks perfectly Tacitean to me from phrases I used to support my earlier substantial post. Does Luc have anything to say about that?

In the end it all comes down to whether the alliteration in the second half of the sentence under review is acceptable Tacitus or not. 'Acceptable' as Tacitus is all we need to dispose of the interpolation argument as we now have no other evidence for it at all.

What I would like to know is if there is any Tacitean specialist who has raised so much as an eyebrow over the style of this sentence. Grant, I presume, does not. Ultimately, I am going to need more than Luc's personal opinion to say this sentence cannot be by Tacitus. So please can he cite an authority or may I just refute his argument by counter asserting?

Finally, Luc said "Their being popularly called "Chestianos" is well documented, as after all weren't they still waiting for a Christ to appear?". Does he mean that Jews were popularly called Chrestianos and if so, please could he cite the authority for this.

Yours

Bede

Bede's Library -faith and reason

rlogan · 01-12-2005, 05:23 PM

Doughty has a piece on this at:

http://www.courses.drew.edu/sp2000/B...1/Tacitus.html

I found myself wanting to quote such large sections of it that I think urging a read in total is more appropriate.

Among other things he points out the absence of reference by other writers who do mention persecution of Christians (Tertullian, Seutonius,Dio Cassius, Pliny the Elder), but not in association with the fire. There is no real crime (requiring trial) that the Christians are in fact charged with here that would warrant death. It is a diversion by Nero - not a punishment of Christians for the fire itself.

The explanation he puts in place of the Christian interpolation is that Nero creates a diversion by taking those already condemned and subjecting them to spectacular tortures. Here is the passge, where the interpolation is removed as a solid block:

Quote:

"Therefore, to put an end to the rumor Nero created a diversion and subjected to the most extra-ordinary tortures those hated for their abominations by the common people. Nero had thrown open the gardens for the spectacle, and was exhibiting a show in the circus, while he mingled with the people in the dress of a charioteer or drove about in a chariot. Hence, even for crimnals who deserved extreme and examplary punishment there arose a feeling of compassion; for it was not, as it seemed, for the public good, but glut one man's cruelty, that they were being punished."

01-13-2005, 12:47 AM

Rlogan,

We have already demonstrated that the sentence we are considering is not a Christian interpolation. Lucretius believes it might be a case where a marginal gloss was inserted into the text by accident. One thing we can be sure of - the interpolation was not by a Christian as a) a Christian would not need to tell his readers the basics from the creed; b) a Christian would give some indication of his regard for Christus; c) a Christian would try and correct Tacitus's remarks about 'horrible superstition'; d) nobody was ever claiming Jesus didn't exist so it is pointless to accuse Christians of manufacturing evidence against an argument that was never considered, let alone used.

As for Doughty, that he has the Jesus Mysteries as a book for an undergraduate course makes him a disgrace to the academic community.

Yours

Bede

Bede's Library - faith and reason

Toto · 01-13-2005, 12:53 AM

Hi Bede - the web page rlogan cites is by Doughty (not to be confused with Doherty). That's Darrell J. Doughty, Professor of New Testament, Drew University.

edited to say: I see you caught your mistake, and now try to smear Doughty with using the Jesus Mysteries book in a course on "Jesus - Myth or History". You can see his reading list for the course here.

Presumably he reads Freke and Gandy as critically as he does other texts.

Lucretius · 01-13-2005, 05:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by andrewcriddle

I'm not sure that just deleting that sentence does result in a passage that reads smoothly.

The second sentence which is IMVHO strongly Tacitean appears to refer back to something (a previous repressive act of some sort) which is (due to the deletion) no longer mentioned in the text.

an additional deletion of 'The deadly superstition....become popular' does result in a smooth text but as I said the deleted pasage does seem if not Tacitean to be a very good imitation.

Andrew Criddle

In the translation given here

Quote:

having been checked for the moment was breaking out again,

(My Emphasis )T
The words "for the moment" are a translation of "In Praesens" which could also be translated as "at the present time" "Now" and even as "at the time I am writing",in my opinion "in praesens" does not seem the make sense when referring to a past event.
Whether it be Judaism or Christianity both were "checked" during the times of Titus and Domitian Judaism particularly after the end of the Jewish uprisings under Vespasian and his son Titus.
The repressive act you mention could be the previous persecution of the Jews in Rome under as I had mentioned Tiberius ,Claudius and possibly Nero.
So a valid translation could be

Quote:

Consequently to get rid of the report Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations called Christians by the populace. The deadly superstition, checked at the present time I am writing was breaking out again, not only in Judea the first source of the evil, but even in Rome where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular.

Lucretius · 01-13-2005, 05:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bede

Rlogan,
We have already demonstrated that the sentence we are considering is not a Christian interpolation. Lucretius believes it might be a case where a marginal gloss was inserted into the text by accident.

I wouldn't go as far as to say it definitley ISN'T a Christian interpolation ,it certainly can be said to show a degree of ignorance about Christ and Christianity ,however all that would prove is the possible writer was not a great theologian or someone completely aware of the history of the religion.
It would be a mistake to assume that however wrote this ,if it is interpolated, would necessarily be either.
Early Christians could possibly be a little confused themselves about their religion

andrewcriddle · 01-13-2005, 05:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rlogan

Doughty has a piece on this
.................................................
Among other things he points out the absence of reference by other writers who do mention persecution of Christians (Tertullian, Seutonius,Dio Cassius, Pliny the Elder), but not in association with the fire. There is no real crime (requiring trial) that the Christians are in fact charged with here that would warrant death. It is a diversion by Nero - not a punishment of Christians for the fire itself.

The explanation he puts in place of the Christian interpolation is that Nero creates a diversion by taking those already condemned and subjecting them to spectacular tortures. Here is the passge, where the interpolation is removed as a solid block:

Quote:

"Therefore, to put an end to the rumor Nero created a diversion and subjected to the most extra-ordinary tortures those hated for their abominations by the common people. Nero had thrown open the gardens for the spectacle, and was exhibiting a show in the circus, while he mingled with the people in the dress of a charioteer or drove about in a chariot. Hence, even for crimnals who deserved extreme and examplary punishment there arose a feeling of compassion; for it was not, as it seemed, for the public good, but glut one man's cruelty, that they were being punished."

It's an interesting suggestion but I would have thought that 'subdidit reos' means 'substituted culprits' ie 'found alternative people to blame' rather than 'created a diversion'. Doughty's reconstruction seems to require that no idea of people being wrongly accused of arson is present in the original and I don't think his suggested deletion achieves this.

In my original post I agreed that it is unlikely as history that Nero really had people falsely executed for starting the great fire of Rome, and I made a suggestion as to what might have really happened.

However, I have doubts whether the passage can be reconstructed so as to avoid having Tacitus imply that Nero did have people falsely executed on such a charge. If so I think the passage must have involved some specific group (IMO the Christians as in the existing text) being falsely so accused.

Andrew Criddle

andrewcriddle · 01-13-2005, 05:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lucretius

The words "for the moment" are a translation of "In Praesens" which could also be translated as "at the present time" "Now" and even as "at the time I am writing",in my opinion "in praesens" does not seem the make sense when referring to a past event.
Whether it be Judaism or Christianity both were "checked" during the times of Titus and Domitian Judaism particularly after the end of the Jewish uprisings under Vespasian and his son Titus.
The repressive act you mention could be the previous persecution of the Jews in Rome under as I had mentioned Tiberius ,Claudius and possibly Nero.
So a valid translation could be

Quote:

Consequently to get rid of the report Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations called Christians by the populace. The deadly superstition, checked at the present time I am writing was breaking out again, not only in Judea the first source of the evil, but even in Rome where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular.

In 'repressaque in praesens exitiablilis superstitio rursum erumpebat' the use of the past participle of reprimo here has IMVHO the effect of a pluperfect passive compared to the imperfect of erumpo, which seems to imply that 'repressaque in praesens' refers to something which had occurred before the events referred to by 'rursum erumpebat'

(I'm putting this tentatively because of the elementary nature of my Latin but I think its probably sound)

Andrew Criddle

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

01-12-2005, 05:11 AM	#41
Chris Weimer Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: none Posts: 9,879	Lucretius, this is what I suggested about the Josephus interpolation: http://neonostalgia.com/bible/forums/viewtopic.php?t=57

01-12-2005, 01:43 PM	#43
Bede Guest Posts: n/a	Thank you to Lucretius for giving us his more considered thoughts. I note that Andrew has already disposed of three of Luc's arguments. The other two are, unfortunately, the most subjective and hence the least convincing. First, you simply cannot tell from just four words that something is schoolboy Latin. It looks perfectly Tacitean to me from phrases I used to support my earlier substantial post. Does Luc have anything to say about that? In the end it all comes down to whether the alliteration in the second half of the sentence under review is acceptable Tacitus or not. 'Acceptable' as Tacitus is all we need to dispose of the interpolation argument as we now have no other evidence for it at all. What I would like to know is if there is any Tacitean specialist who has raised so much as an eyebrow over the style of this sentence. Grant, I presume, does not. Ultimately, I am going to need more than Luc's personal opinion to say this sentence cannot be by Tacitus. So please can he cite an authority or may I just refute his argument by counter asserting? Finally, Luc said "Their being popularly called "Chestianos" is well documented, as after all weren't they still waiting for a Christ to appear?". Does he mean that Jews were popularly called Chrestianos and if so, please could he cite the authority for this. Yours Bede Bede's Library -faith and reason

01-13-2005, 12:47 AM	#45
Bede Guest Posts: n/a	Rlogan, We have already demonstrated that the sentence we are considering is not a Christian interpolation. Lucretius believes it might be a case where a marginal gloss was inserted into the text by accident. One thing we can be sure of - the interpolation was not by a Christian as a) a Christian would not need to tell his readers the basics from the creed; b) a Christian would give some indication of his regard for Christus; c) a Christian would try and correct Tacitus's remarks about 'horrible superstition'; d) nobody was ever claiming Jesus didn't exist so it is pointless to accuse Christians of manufacturing evidence against an argument that was never considered, let alone used. As for Doughty, that he has the Jesus Mysteries as a book for an undergraduate course makes him a disgrace to the academic community. Yours Bede Bede's Library - faith and reason

01-13-2005, 12:53 AM	#46
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	Hi Bede - the web page rlogan cites is by Doughty (not to be confused with Doherty). That's Darrell J. Doughty, Professor of New Testament, Drew University. edited to say: I see you caught your mistake, and now try to smear Doughty with using the Jesus Mysteries book in a course on "Jesus - Myth or History". You can see his reading list for the course here. Presumably he reads Freke and Gandy as critically as he does other texts.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.