rlogan

This has been a really great set of exchanges. I am glad Vork responded, but even more encouraged this was your response, Ben.


Seems to me you have problems of your own with Tacitus, Ben - I don't want to put words in your mouth, so I won't.

But if there are some problems with Tacitus then we've got to probe why - and that opens up some real cans of worms.

Ben C Smith

Michael gave a superb answer to my illegitimate lumping together of fitness and patness, and I think this kind of insight might prove very useful in the catching out of forgeries in the not so distant future.

I still think there is very little chance that the Tacitus passage itself is a forgery (especially a Christian forgery; but has anyone ever considered a pagan or Jewish forgery, I wonder?). However, I do see the acute potential for some exaggeration in the description of the Neronian persecution in the passage.

Many thanks for the edifying exchange.

Ben.

rlogan

That's why he's on the varsity team.

yes, and there are other possibilities here:

Well, I'm pretty wiliing to go down this road and was hoping you would too.

Although I have in the past thought of this passage as a forgery, it is sure worth a shot figuring out why Tacitus would write such an exaggerated account.

One route is that Tacitus is repeating something from Christian sources. Another is that he has his own motivations, such as making Nero look even worse than he was. (Pagan forgery could work here)

Going to mull those over.




likewise, for sure.

yalla

For Ben:

I agree with your conclusion that the "in the meanwhile/default" position is for Tacitus to "persecute'' the Christians for their name alone.
But that is still contra to his opening line which seeks advice as to whether or not that is the correct procedure.
Which means he is ignorant of what is correct procedure for dealing with Christians.
It's the whole point of the letter...'What do I do with this mob and why?"
Assuming, as has been suggested, that persecution of Christians has been widespread in the Empire and considering his wide range of top level experience that is odd, is it not?

This is not just anybody, this is a major mature experienced official whose appointments covered the areas of government relevant to persecution of Christians. He is more likely to know than the Emperor, it's his job.

"Having never been present at any trials of the Christians, I am unacquainted with the method and limits to be observed either in examining or punishing them."

This too strikes me as strange.
As I said before "Yet Pliny says "I have never participated in the trials of Christians" and although ambiguous [it does not state no such occurred] it still seems to imply a lack of knowledge at odds with his public roles during that time."

If persecution has been as widespread as has been suggested then I would expect such a senior official as T to be better informed.
After all the letter of "Clem. of Rome" gets it's late 1C date from it's alleged reference to persecution of Christians. I wonder where Pliny was, and what he was doing at that time?
Pliny comes across as strangely uninformed about those areas, religion, government and law where he is so experienced.

I find the whole tenor of this letter to be out of sorts with what could be expected from a senior official.
cheers
yalla

Ecrasez L'infame

It is all very odd (I think you made a typo in your opening sentence - s/b Pliny). Things does do not add up, however you look at them.

Has anybody ever considered Tacitus is genuine but Pliny is forgery? P is certainly very nice to the Christians - their worse crime is their stubbornness. He seems almost to be saying to Trajan, are you sure you want these people to be persecuted?

I have a vague memory that we know the Pliny letter and Trajan's answer through Euserbius, but don't have time to check now.

Regards

Robert

Johann_Kaspar

1) There is no way to prove and to know if Tacitus wrote this or if it was added, unless a new text is found which could have escaped the control of the church.

2) It is impossible to know what was the text written by Josephus, unless...

3) dito. (But it is quite unlikely that Josephus would mention a Messiah like it is appearing here).

BTW: the Slavonic version of the War is much more interesting (than the TF), but nobody seems interested to investigate this text. I understand the xians, for it would prove to be quite embarrassing for them, but I do not understand the atheists who could make quite good points, although I am doubting that a decisive conclusion could be made here too.

Ecrasez L'infame

Dunno, just thinking, a forged Pliny letter could be used by the Christians of the time - it needn't necessarily be later. For example, a Christian is talking to a pagan, and the pagan repeats all the stories that are circulating about the abominations (whatever they are). The Christian says, aha, but that's where you're wrong, my friend. An official of the Roman Empire has thoroughly investigated the matter and found there's no truth in it. Here's the proof [brandishes the letter - is the pagan going to write to Trajan to check it's authentic?]. True [the Christian continues] the official finds that we won't let other people tell us what to think - but isn't that something to be proud of, rather than being criminal? Why don't you come along on Sunday and see what we're really like...

I don't mean to suggest the stories were true - only that they were there, and this would have been a good way of countering them. I don't see why fundamentalists in antiquity should use different methods from those of today, provided they worked.

Of course, this would mean Trajan's response is forged as well. But that says not much more than that the ban must continue - which everyone knew anyway. Moreover, T's tone is somewhat reluctant, as if saying - you're right, they probably shouldn't be illegal...

Amaleq13

I've always thought of him as more concerned about how to process such persecutions than about the possible innocence of Christians.

"What box am I supposed to check on this form, sir? There isn't one for 'Failure to deny being a Christian' and I can't find anything else they're doing that fits one of the other options."

exile

Christians were seen as political revolutionaries and were treated much as most states treat dissidents - rather better in fact, as Trajan wanted to avoid a witch hunt developing based on anonymous denunciations - and recantation was seen as sufficient to avoid punishment.

andrewcriddle

The primary source for the letters about the Christians is the 10th book of Pliny's collected letters.

However Tertullian in his Apology quotes this correspondence and Eusebius in Book III of the Ecclesiastical History quotes Tertullian quoting Pliny.

Eusebius does not seem to have had direct access to the letters of Pliny.

Andrew Criddle