Page 2 of 7

Re: Eusebius as a forger.

Posted: Wed May 15, 2019 1:20 pm
by DCHindley
Now I am not of the opinion that Eusebius was a master forger in support of his views about early Christian development.

That does not mean that Eusebius did not *want* early Christian history & literature to have been just so or said a certain that, because the church of his location (which was in Caesarea, not Rome) had already come to believe certain things about their history, which simply *had* to be true, so Eusebius made it so.

So Eusebius, who has been socialized by means of fully developed traditions within his community, experienced cognitive dissonance on account of poor documentation of the process by which these traditions had developed. He has bits and pieces of literature available that sometimes contradicted the established traditions at points. So, like any rational soul, he rationalized solutions that "explained" away the contradictions.

Many "classical" historians treat an author like Eusebius as using identifiable sources to which we can assign levels of trustworthiness and reliability. Postmodernist oriented historians, treat his portrayal of sources as his rationalizations of the sources and traditions he had been exposed to. Rationalizations generally reduce the dissonance between sources by coming up with ways to explain them away.

This does not mean that actual historical facts cannot be inferred from his rationalizations. Postmodern historians go about that all the time.

Doesn't anyone study psychology or postmodern historians?

DCH

Re: Eusebius as a forger.

Posted: Wed May 15, 2019 1:38 pm
by Secret Alias
Are you saying that Eusebius didn't lie or outright falsify texts to defend Origen? I think that is indisputable.

Re: Eusebius as a forger.

Posted: Wed May 15, 2019 1:57 pm
by Ben C. Smith
Secret Alias wrote:
Wed May 15, 2019 1:38 pm
Are you saying that Eusebius didn't lie or outright falsify texts to defend Origen? I think that is indisputable.
I am looking for indisputable cases; that would be great.

Re: Eusebius as a forger.

Posted: Wed May 15, 2019 2:01 pm
by Secret Alias
He stole Pamphilus's name. Sort of like a fox buying a chicken coop.

Re: Eusebius as a forger.

Posted: Wed May 15, 2019 2:02 pm
by Secret Alias
I think it is REASONABLE to assume Eusebius falsified Alexandrian tests to purge them of support for Arius. Not sure what that means from an "on the ground" perspective.

Re: Eusebius as a forger.

Posted: Wed May 15, 2019 2:05 pm
by Secret Alias
Eusebius often doesn't acknowledge when he is using a source. That's plagiarism in modernity at least

Re: Eusebius as a forger.

Posted: Wed May 15, 2019 2:07 pm
by Secret Alias
And on the subject of Jerome's testimony regarding Eusebius's fixing of Origen at the very least it's unprecedented.

Re: Eusebius as a forger.

Posted: Wed May 15, 2019 2:16 pm
by Ben C. Smith
Secret Alias wrote:
Wed May 15, 2019 2:01 pm
He stole Pamphilus's name. Sort of like a fox buying a chicken coop.
Not sure how this one relates.
Secret Alias wrote:
Wed May 15, 2019 2:07 pm
And on the subject of Jerome's testimony regarding Eusebius's fixing of Origen at the very least it's unprecedented.
What is the reference?
Secret Alias wrote:
Wed May 15, 2019 2:05 pm
Eusebius often doesn't acknowledge when he is using a source. That's plagiarism in modernity at least
Plagiarism by modern standards was rampant in antiquity. I am asking about forgery, not plagiarism.
Secret Alias wrote:
Wed May 15, 2019 2:02 pm
I think it is REASONABLE to assume Eusebius falsified Alexandrian tests to purge them of support for Arius. Not sure what that means from an "on the ground" perspective.
I do not want to have to assume, however reasonably. I am looking for solid leads.

Re: Eusebius as a forger.

Posted: Wed May 15, 2019 4:32 pm
by Secret Alias
Stealing a writer's name in antiquity is the equivalent of stealing someone's credit card today. Even as a psychological statement it reminds me of serial killers who keep little mementos of their victims. It is odd that the Apology for Origen was written by the two men. Why did Pamphilus need Eusebius? If Pamphilus wrote the work and Eusebius was merely the publisher then why does Eusebius take partial credit? Answer even at the start of his literary career he was taking over people's identities.

Re: Eusebius as a forger.

Posted: Wed May 15, 2019 4:35 pm
by Secret Alias
On the reason why Eusebius needed Pamphilus - https://books.google.com/books?id=NN5-A ... me&f=false