Of Nazirites & Naṣoraeans.

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
User avatar
Jax
Posts: 1087
Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2017 6:10 am

Re: Of Nazirites & Naṣoraeans.

Post by Jax » Sun Apr 04, 2021 6:58 am

^ A classic that never gets old. :D

cora
Posts: 161
Joined: Tue Jul 21, 2020 2:57 pm

Re: Of Nazirites & Naṣoraeans.

Post by cora » Sun Apr 04, 2021 7:03 pm

Hai Lane,
I am trying at different pages to reach you. I have read everything you sent me. This is completely out of the box thinking that I really like. It shows independence in thinking and studying, which is extremely rare these days. And is therefore already great. I would like to talk about it with you, but can this be done off-line, via private messages or so? Your view actually touches my view. I do not want my view anymore in the open because of the reactions mostly, and you don't want your view connected to mine in the open, I guess. Okay?
greetings from Cora.

User avatar
Jax
Posts: 1087
Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2017 6:10 am

Re: Of Nazirites & Naṣoraeans.

Post by Jax » Mon Apr 05, 2021 9:46 am

cora wrote:
Sun Apr 04, 2021 7:03 pm
Hai Lane,
I am trying at different pages to reach you. I have read everything you sent me. This is completely out of the box thinking that I really like. It shows independence in thinking and studying, which is extremely rare these days. And is therefore already great. I would like to talk about it with you, but can this be done off-line, via private messages or so? Your view actually touches my view. I do not want my view anymore in the open because of the reactions mostly, and you don't want your view connected to mine in the open, I guess. Okay?
greetings from Cora.
Hai Cora, I responded to you over here viewtopic.php?f=3&t=7792&start=180 :cheers:

User avatar
rakovsky
Posts: 1271
Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2015 8:07 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Of Nazirites & Naṣoraeans.

Post by rakovsky » Wed Apr 07, 2021 1:27 pm

Bernard Muller wrote:
Sat Apr 03, 2021 10:05 am
This Pliny is Pliny the Elder, not Pliny the Younger, isn't it?
Correct.

User avatar
rakovsky
Posts: 1271
Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2015 8:07 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Of Nazirites & Naṣoraeans.

Post by rakovsky » Wed Apr 07, 2021 4:16 pm

Ben C. Smith wrote:
Sat Apr 03, 2021 9:48 am
In an essay, "The Location of Tarichaea," a city in Galilee destroyed in 66 AD, which Pliny described, Nikos Kokkinos writes that Pliny was using the governor of Syria in the mid-late 1st century AD as his source on Galilee's geography:
Little doubt may remain as to whether Tarichaea would have been known enough to Pliny, whose main source for this part of his work was evidently C. Licinius Mucianus, the legatus Augusti pro praetore in Syria at the very time of the destruction of Tarichaea (Jos., War 4.32; B. W. Jones 1984, 35, 39; Da˛browa 1998, 58–59), as has been argued elsewhere (Kokkinos 2002, 729–733).
Do you have the 2002 article he references in which he apparently makes this argument? If so, what does he say?

Not being an expert on Pliny, I am reliant upon the same sets of sources, both ancient and modern, that anyone else is. Let me know what you find about Mucianus.
The 2002 article that you asked about is Nikos Kokkinos, "The City of 'Mariamme:' An Unknown Herodian Connection?," Mediterraneo Antico 5 (2002): 715-746. I don't have the article.

Wikipedia notes Pliny the Elder using Mucianus:
For a number of items relating to works of art near the coast of Asia Minor and in the adjacent islands, Pliny was indebted to the general, statesman, orator and historian Gaius Licinius Mucianus, who died before 77.
Joan Taylor writes in her article "On Pliny, the Essene Location and Kh. Qumran":
It has been suggested by Stephen Goranson that Pliny’s source on the Essenes is a lost geographical work by Marcus Vipsanius Agrippa (63–12 B.C.E.),15 though Nikos Kokkinos’ recent insight that this particular sec- tion may come from another lost work, by C. Licinius Mucianus (legatus of Syria 67–69 C.E.), is significant, since Mucianus made a compilation of observations regarding curiosities of the world (Pliny, Nat. Hist. 7.36), a collection of paradoxa or mirabilia in which the wonders and paradoxes of Judaea’s waters would have been appropriate, as would the marvel of the ever-enduring, sex-eschewing Essenes.16

16. Nikos Kokkinos, “The City of ‘Mariamme’: an Unknown Herodian Connection?” DSD 16,1_1-21.indd 7 1/13/2009 3:19:46 PM
Wikipedia says about Mucianus:
"He was also the author of a memoir, chiefly dealing with the natural history and geography of the East, a text often quoted by Pliny[1] as the source of miraculous occurrences."
1. Chisholm, Hugh, ed. (1911). "Mucianus, Licinius" . Encyclopædia Britannica. 18 (11th ed.). Cambridge University Press. p. 954.
Encyclopedia Britannica (1911) says about Mucianus:
He made a collection of the speeches and letters of the Romans of the older republican period, probably including a corpus of proceedings of the senate (Ada senatus), and was the author of a work, chiefly dealing with the natural history and geography of the East, which is often quoted by Pliny as an authority, especially for fabulous statements.
Scott Smith writes in "Myth and Mythography in Pliny's Geography":
To graft other material25 onto this basic geographical network, he
certainly drew from various other works, including Agrippa’s commentarii, administrative documents, any number of Varro’s works, Mucianus’ work on mirabilia while governor of Lycia, Cato’s Origines, an anonymous Peri ɋɛɐɘɋ that probably included material from Callimachus’ work of the same title, and, of course, his own experiences in Spain, Africa and Germany.
https://polymnia-revue.univ-lille.fr/pd ... -Smith.pdf

Thomas Caldwell has a section of his thesis "The Career of Licinius Mucianus" dedicated to "The Fragments of Mucianus in Pliny the Elder’s Naturalis Historia." He notes:
The importance of Pliny as a primary source for the career of Mucianus derives largely from the fact that much of the material within the Naturalis Historia originates from an earlier text composed by Mucianus himself.
Caldwell goes into detail about this here: https://minerva-access.unimelb.edu.au/b ... sequence=1

In his Natural History, Pliny writes:
Chapter 106:
In the island of Andros, at the temple of Father Bacchus, we are assured by Mucianus, who was thrice consul, that there is a spring, which, on the nones of January, always has the flavour of wine ; it is called Dios Theodosia.

BOOK II, Chapter 113:
Summary.—The facts, statements, and observations contained in this Book amount in number to 417.

ROMAN authors QUOTED.—M. Varro\ Sulpicius Gallus^, Titus Cajsar^ the Emperor, Q.Tubero^ TuUius Tiro^ L.Piso^
T. Livius'', Cornelius Nepos^, Sebosus^, CseUus Antipater^", Eabianus\ Antias^, Mucianus 3, Csecina'', who wrote on the
Etruscan discipline, Tarquitius^, who did the same, Julius Aquila'^, who also did the same, and Sergius.
  • 3. Marcus Licuiius Crassus Mucianus. He was instrumental in raising the Emperor Vespasian to the throne, and was Consul in the years A.D. 52, 70, and 74 He published three Books of Epistles, and a History in eleven Books, which appears to have treated chiefly of Eastern affairs.
Book III, Chapter 9.
Another wonderful circumstance too. 'Near Circeii are the Pomptine Marshes^, formerly the site, according to Mucianus, who was thrice consul, of four-and-twenty cities.

Book 4, Chapter 22
This island long floated on the
waves, and, as tradition says, was the only one that had never experienced an earthquake, do\Mi to the time of M. Yarro* i Mucianus however has informed us, that it has been twice so visited. ... Xext to this island is Eliene*, which Anticlides calls by the name of Celadussa, and Callidemus, Artemite ; Scyros, which the old writers have stated to be twenty miles in circumference, but Mucianus 160.

Book 4, Chapter 24
We learn from Yarro and most of the ancient writers, that the circumference of the Euxine is altogether 2150 miles ; but
to this number Cornelius Nepos adds 350 more ; while Artemidorus makes it 2919 miles, Agrippa 23G0, and Mucianus 2425.

Book 5, Chapter 9:
Between Ai-sinoites and Memphites, a lake^ 250 miles, or, according to what Mucianus says, 450 miles in circumference and fifty paces deep,
has been formed by artificial means: after the king by whose orders it was made, it is called by the name of Moeris.

Book 5, Chp. 17 Section.1: Close to this river is Ptolemais, formerly called Ace, a colony of Claudius Caesar (mid-1st century AD) emperor;
Chp. 17. Section 2: On the coast, again, and lying beneath Libanus, is the river Magoras, the colony of Berytus, which bears the name of Felix Julia (who renovated portions of a house in Pompei "to apartments available for rent and other parts for public use after the major earthquake in 62 AD", per Wikipedia)

Book 5, Chapter 19, THE REMAINING PARTS OF SYRIA, is where he talks about the Nazerini.

Book 5, Chapter 20. THE EUPHRATES:
Domitius Corbulo [c. AD 7 – 67] says, that it [the Euphrates] rises in Mount Aba ; Licinius Mucianus, at the foot of a mountain which he calls Capotes, twelve miles above Zimara, and that at its source it has the name of Pyxurates.

Book 5, Chp. 34.
In the Phoenician Sea, before Joppe there is the island of Paria, the whole of it forming a town. Here, they say, Andromeda was exposed to the monster : the island also of Arados, already mentioned^, between which and the continent, as we learn from Mucianus, at a depth of fifty cubits in the sea, fresh water is brought up from a spring at the very bottom by means of leather pipes.
Since Pliny in Chapters and sections surrounding his chapter on the Nazerini mentions places named in the 1st century AD and cites Corbulo and Mucianus as sources of information, one can't automatically say that the information in Book 5 Chapter 19 must have been totally from the 1st century Syrian figure. What is the basis for the assumption that unless Pliny specifically cites sources after the 1st century BC (eg. Corbulo) OR that the information can only be from the 1st century AD (ie. the information on Ptomemais, Claudius' colony), then Pliny MUST have been relying on a 1st century BC source? This kind of distinction and assumption seems to be artificial and unreasonable. One can guess that Pliny took some information from a 1st century BC source, but since he repeatedly cites information only possibly known to 1st century AD sources, the reasonable conclusion is that some of this kind of information in this part was also taken from mid-late 1st century AD sources like Mucianus (Consul in 52, 70, and 74 AD) leading up to Pliny's own date of publishing.

The Oxford Classical Dictionary says about Mucianus: "Nero appointed Mucianus governor of *Syria about the time when he sent *Vespasian to *Judaea. Reconciled with Vespasian after earlier disagreements, Mucianus encouraged his designs and secured the allegiance of Syria."
So it makes sense that the information about Syria would have come from after Mucianus' c. 66-68 AD appointment there.

User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8886
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Of Nazirites & Naṣoraeans.

Post by Ben C. Smith » Wed Apr 07, 2021 4:52 pm

rakovsky wrote:
Wed Apr 07, 2021 4:16 pm
Since Pliny in Chapters and sections surrounding his chapter on the Nazerini mentions places named in the 1st century AD and cites Corbulo and Mucianus as sources of information, one can't automatically say that the information in Book 5 Chapter 19 must have been totally from the 1st century Syrian figure.
Your sources seem unanimous that Pliny used Mucianus mainly for his statements about strange, fantastical, and unusual phenomena (such as springs which always taste of wine). How would this tendency apply to the name of a tetrarchy in Syria?

User avatar
rakovsky
Posts: 1271
Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2015 8:07 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Of Nazirites & Naṣoraeans.

Post by rakovsky » Sat Apr 10, 2021 9:13 am

Ben C. Smith wrote:
Sat Apr 03, 2021 9:48 am

Do you have the 2002 article he references in which he apparently makes this argument? If so, what does he say?
Kokkinos wrote to me "Unfortunately, my article on the city of Mariamme does not exist in electronic form, so you have to order it from an academic library. "

User avatar
rakovsky
Posts: 1271
Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2015 8:07 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Of Nazirites & Naṣoraeans.

Post by rakovsky » Sat Apr 10, 2021 9:41 am

Ben C. Smith wrote:
Wed Apr 07, 2021 4:52 pm
Your sources seem unanimous that Pliny used Mucianus mainly for his statements about strange, fantastical, and unusual phenomena (such as springs which always taste of wine). How would this tendency apply to the name of a tetrarchy in Syria?
The Short Answer is: Most sources that I cited do not say that he was used mainly for statements about marvels. Most of the 6 explicit citations to Mucianus in Pliny in the first 5 Books of Natural History do not mention fantastical phenomena, but rather facts like the circumference of a lake. ' service as governor of Syria would make his writing on facts about Syria's tetrachies relevant.


Writing about Book V, which has the section on the Nazerini, Kokkinos argued that Mucianus was the "main source" for this part of Natural History. Joan Taylor supported him.

What I found and quoted in Kokkinos, Wikipedia, and Thomas Caldwell do not mention Mucianus being used for fabulous statements. Joan Taylor said that Pliny using a work on marvels would be appropriate for Pliny's writing on the springs, but not that Mucianus was mainly used for writing on marvels. Instead, Taylor supported Kokkinos' argument that Mucianus, the governor of Syria, was the main source for Pliny's writing on Syria.

The Encyclopedia Britannica says that Mucianus' work was "chiefly dealing with the natural history and geography of the East, which is often quoted by Pliny as an authority, especially for fabulous statements." Since most quotes about Mucianus that I found in Pliny were not for fabulous statements, the encyclopedia's term "especially" would be misleading if it means "mostly."

The nature of the tetrarchies and kingdoms or rulerships in Syria would be relevant both to Mucianus' service as governor, as well as to his writing on the geography of his territory.

User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8886
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Of Nazirites & Naṣoraeans.

Post by Ben C. Smith » Sat Apr 10, 2021 10:13 am

rakovsky wrote:
Sat Apr 10, 2021 9:41 am
Ben C. Smith wrote:
Wed Apr 07, 2021 4:52 pm
Your sources seem unanimous that Pliny used Mucianus mainly for his statements about strange, fantastical, and unusual phenomena (such as springs which always taste of wine). How would this tendency apply to the name of a tetrarchy in Syria?
The Short Answer is: Most sources that I cited do not say that he was used mainly for statements about marvels.
??

Joan Taylor, "curiosities of the world," "a collection of paradoxa or mirabilia."

Wikipedia, "a text often quoted by Pliny as the source of miraculous occurrences."

Encyclopedia Britannica, "often quoted by Pliny as an authority, especially for fabulous statements."

Scott Smith, "Mucianus’ work on mirabilia."

Thomas Caldwell, "the most common of these interpretations asserts that Mucianus’ work constituted a compilation of natural marvels or prodigies," "it is clear from the fragments that Mucianus had a predilection towards 'bizarre items of the tabloid variety.'"

Oxford Classical Dictionary, nothing about Mucianus' text or Pliny's use of it.

I will grant you that Caldwell questions this customary perception a bit, but even he does not peel it back entirely.

What I am wondering is what makes you think that the name of this tetrarchy specifically comes from Musianus.

User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8886
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Of Nazirites & Naṣoraeans.

Post by Ben C. Smith » Sat Apr 10, 2021 10:22 am

Think of it this way. Musianus seems to be quoted for specific facts about geographical and natural entities which Pliny is discussing; never mind whether those facts are miraculous or not; they are details about places (such as their size or distance from other places). Agrippa, on the other hand, seems to have compiled a survey of place names for Augustus. A. H. M. Jones, on pages 262-264 of The Cities of the Eastern Roman Provinces, quoted upthread, makes an argument for which names came from an official register of place names, and the Tetrarchy of the Nazerini is one of those names. Just the bare name on a list of other names sounds more to me like what Agrippa was doing than like what Musianus was doing. Do you disagree with that?

Post Reply