Reconsidering the date of the Martyrdom of Polycarp

Covering all topics of history and the interpretation of texts, posts here should conform to the norms of academic discussion: respectful and with a tight focus on the subject matter.

Moderator: andrewcriddle

User avatar
Peter Kirby
Site Admin
Posts: 8409
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 2:13 pm
Location: Santa Clara
Contact:

Re: Reconsidering the date of the Martyrdom of Polycarp

Post by Peter Kirby »

To me this is most striking:

... and he appointed a number of ambassadors for this purpose from among his comrades, styling them "messengers from the dead" and "underworld couriers.” (ch. 41)

The Letter of the Smyrnaeans (Martyrdom of Polycarp) could be in view here, as a letter written after Polycarp's death.
"... almost every critical biblical position was earlier advanced by skeptics." - Raymond Brown
User avatar
stephan happy huller
Posts: 1480
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 3:06 pm
Contact:

Re: Reconsidering the date of the Martyrdom of Polycarp

Post by stephan happy huller »

Lightfoot connects it with Ignatius
Everyone loves the happy times
User avatar
Peter Kirby
Site Admin
Posts: 8409
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 2:13 pm
Location: Santa Clara
Contact:

Re: Reconsidering the date of the Martyrdom of Polycarp

Post by Peter Kirby »

stephan happy huller wrote:Lightfoot connects it with Ignatius
Yes I read that too. ;)

They're not mutually exclusive.
"... almost every critical biblical position was earlier advanced by skeptics." - Raymond Brown
User avatar
Peter Kirby
Site Admin
Posts: 8409
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 2:13 pm
Location: Santa Clara
Contact:

Re: Reconsidering the date of the Martyrdom of Polycarp

Post by Peter Kirby »

J.V.M. Sturdy in his posthumous book has favored a third century date of the Martyrdom of Polycarp for slightly different reasons from Moss, Godfrey, or my essay (Redrawing the Boundaries, pp. 17-18):

The Martyrdom of Polycarp
It must be added, by way of conclusion, that the Martyrdom of Polycarp is
not, as is generally supposed, a contemporary account of the event. It is
specific, detailed and circumstantial. It is not a bare account but a work of
very considerable literary skill and sympathetic appeal. It contains miracles
(anticipations by dreams, the voice from heaven and the miraculous
protection from fire) which are generally taken as a warning sign in accounts
of martyrdoms; it has detailed dialogue, which is obviously a literary
construction, and a liturgical prayer which would be more in place a
hundred years later. And, it will be remembered, it contains the phrases
"the catholic church" and "Christianity" which are not otherwise attested
until about 200 CE If it were contemporary it must be regarded in view of
the miracles as untrustworthy in detail. All the signs are that it is not
contemporary but a fine later writing-up of the tradition about Polycarp.
This carries the consequence that we can no longer take the great phrase
"eighty-six years I have served him, and he never did me any wrong" as
reliable tradition. It is a dramatic set piece. Polycarp may well have been an
old man when he died; but we have no strong reason to think that he was
as old as eighty-six, nor that the Martyrdom contains indisputable evidence
for his death.

Mentioned again on p. 24: "The Martyrdom of Polycarp was written in all probability in the third century CE."

Not to appeal to authority, since plenty of authorities favor a mid second century date, but rather to show that there has been disagreement before among scholars.
"... almost every critical biblical position was earlier advanced by skeptics." - Raymond Brown
Post Reply