New Evidence for Celsus's True Word Being Written 177 - 180 CE

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Secret Alias
Posts: 18922
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

New Evidence for Celsus's True Word Being Written 177 - 180 CE

Post by Secret Alias »

As I noted in another thread here is a possible confirmation of a 175 - 180 CE dating for Celsus and his True Word. The first bit of evidence that has been used to suggest this is the references to two emperors:
The "True Discourse" of Celsus was composed in the last years of Marcus Aurelius. It notices the rescript of that emperor, issued in 177 (or 176 at the earliest), against popular tumults caused by the introduction of a new religion (viii, 69). In viii. 71 the author speaks of two emperors reigning at the time, which fixes the date in the joint rule of Marcus Aurelius and Commodus, from 177 to 180. He was thus at least a contemporary of the Celsus to whom Lucian dedicated his "Alexander," and some have supposed the two to be identical. Lucian's friend, however, was an Epicurean, while our Celsus, in spite of Origen, stands out clearly as a Platonist; and the books κατά μάγων (Lucian, Alex., lxi.; Origen, i. 68, κατά μαγείας do not seem to fit in with the conception and tone of the "True Discourse." The latter, though usually divided into eight books, seems to have been but one originally; and, according to Origen (viii. 76), Celsus intended to write another, "in which he engaged to supply practical rules of living to those who felt disposed to embrace his opinions." In iv. 36 Origen mentions two more books written by a Celsus whose identity with ours he leaves uncertain; but as he seems to know nothing of these, it is at least possible that he has misunderstood a notice referring to the two already mentioned: Keim, followed by Pélagaud, places the home of Celsus in the West, probably in Rome, where he thinks the "True Discourse" was written—partly on the ground that the Jew depicted by Celsus is a Roman and not an Eastern Jew. The old view, adopted also by Aubé, that the book was composed in the East, probably in Alexandria, rested upon its accurate knowledge of Egypt; and this view might be supported by the contention that as a matter of fact Celsus's Jew is really not the Roman type, but belongs to those Eastern Jewish circles in which the doctrine of the Logos was familiar; thus in Origen, ii. 31, the Jew of Celsus says, "If your Logos is the Son of God, we also give our assent to the same."
My new evidence. Celsus's original statement:
ὅτι χθὲς καὶ πρώην καὶ ὁπηνίκα τοῦτον ἐκολάζομεν βουκολοῦντα ὑμᾶς, ἀπέστητε τοῦ πατρίου νόμου, οὐδὲν ἀκριβὲς εἰδὼς ἐν οἷς ἔλεγεν, ὡς ἐδείξαμεν
Origen's loose paraphrase:
ὅτι ὁ χθὲς καὶ πρώην σταυρωθεὶς ἑκὼν τοῦτον τὸν θάνατον ὑπὲρ τοῦ γένους τῶν ἀνθρώπων ἀνεδέξατο, ἀνάλογον τοῖς ἀποθανοῦσιν ὑπὲρ τῶν πατρίδων ἐπὶ τῷ σβέσαι λοιμικὰ κρατήσαντα καταστήματα ἢ ἀφορίας ἢ δυσπλοΐας
βουκολοῦντα — βουκολέω tend cattle pres part act neut nom/voc/acc pl (attic epic doric) βουκολέω tend cattle pres part act masc acc sg (attic epic doric). I also find the use of the term βουκολοῦντα to describe Jesus is likely indicative of the time the treatise was written i.e. 170 CE connecting Jesus to the Alexandrian rebels, the Bucolici, from the "Cow Pasture" who Avidius put down c. 175 CE. Many scholars have suspicions the group were Christians.

At the end of Book 2 there is another reference from Origen worth citing:
The conclusion of all these arguments regarding Jesus is thus stated by the Jew: He was therefore a man, and of such a nature, as the truth itself proves, and reason demonstrates him to be. I do not know, however, whether a man who had the courage to spread throughout the entire world his doctrine of religious worship and teaching, could accomplish what he wished without the divine assistance, and could rise superior to all who withstood the progress of his doctrine — kings and rulers, and the Roman senate, and governors in all places, and the common people. And how could the nature of a man possessed of no inherent excellence convert so vast a multitude? For it would not be wonderful if it were only the wise who were so convened; but it is the most irrational of men, and those devoted to their passions, and who, by reason of their irrationality, change with the greater difficulty so as to adopt a more temperate course of life. And yet it is because Christ was the power of God and the wisdom of the Father that He accomplished, and still accomplishes, such results, although neither the Jews nor Greeks who disbelieve His word will so admit. And therefore we shall not cease to believe in God, according to the precepts of Jesus Christ, and to seek to convert those who are blind on the subject of religion, although it is they who are truly blind themselves that charge us with blindness: and they, whether Jews or Greeks, who lead astray those that follow them, accuse us of seducing men — a good seduction, truly!— that they may become temperate instead of dissolute [κἂν οἱ ἀληθῶς τυφλώτ τοντες λοιδορῶνται ἡμῖν ὡς τυφλώττουσι καὶ οἱ βουκολοῦντες, εἴτε Ἰουδαῖοι εἴτε Ἕλληνες, τοὺς συγκατατιθεμένους αὐτοῖς ἡμῖν ἐγκαλῶσιν ὡς βουκολοῦσι τοὺς ἀνθρώπους· καλήν γε βουκόλησιν] or at least may make advances to temperance; may become just instead of unjust, or at least may tend to become so; prudent instead of foolish, or be on the way to become such; and instead of cowardice, meanness, and timidity, may exhibit the virtues of fortitude and courage, especially displayed in the struggles undergone for the sake of their religion towards God, the Creator of all things. Jesus Christ therefore came announced beforehand, not by one prophet, but by all; and it was a proof of the ignorance of Celsus, to represent a Jew as saying that one prophet only had predicted the advent of Christ. But as this Jew of Celsus, after being thus introduced, asserting that these things were indeed in conformity with his own law, has somewhere here ended his discourse, with a mention of other matters not worthy of remembrance, I too shall here terminate this second book of my answer to his treatise. But if God permit, and the power of Christ abide in my soul, I shall endeavour in the third book to deal with the subsequent statements of Celsus.
Secret Alias
Posts: 18922
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: New Evidence for Celsus's True Word Being Written 177 - 180 CE

Post by Secret Alias »

Wyttenbach:

Celsus apud Ori- gen.II , p . 389 , B , τοῦτον ἐκολάζομεν βουκολοῦνται ὑμᾶς , hunc , Christum , vos decipientem punivimus : cui reponit Ori- genes p . 447 , B , καὶ οἱ βουκολοῦντες · καὶ ἡμῖν ἐγκαλῶσιν ὡς βου- κολοῦσι τοὺς ἀνθρώπους καλήν με βουκόλησιν .

Another positive reference to "herdsmen" as Christians in Clement 5.1:
For he, having derived his knowledge from the barbarian philosophy, is acquainted with the purification by fire of those who have led bad lives, which the Stoics afterwards called the Conflagration (ekpurwsiu), in which also they teach that each will arise exactly as he was, so treating of the resurrection; while Plato says as follows, that the earth at certain periods is purified by fire and water: "There have been many destructions of men in many ways; and there shall be very great ones by fire and water; and others briefer by innumerable causes." And after a little he adds: "And, in truth, there is a change of the objects which revolve about earth and heaven; and in the course of long periods there is the destruction of the objects on earth by a great conflagration." Then he subjoins respecting the deluge: "But when, again, the gods deluge the earth to purify it with water, those on the mountains herdsmen (βουκόλοι) and shepherds, are saved; those in your cities are carried down by the rivers into the sea."
The old priest of Sais who in the Timaeus of Plato relates so many extraordinary things to Solon alludes to a tradition attributing the devastation of these mountainous tracts to some marvellous change in the course of nature, and the too near approach of the sun. Some obscure notion of this kind the Greeks enveloped in the poetical fable of Phaeton. He further observes that when the low lands were devastated by a deluge, the shepherds and herdsmen removed to the mountains and were there saved from destruction consequently those mountains could not have been wholly destitute of vegetation
Secret Alias
Posts: 18922
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: New Evidence for Celsus's True Word Being Written 177 - 180 CE

Post by Secret Alias »

St Mark, the early Alexandrian church and the Cow Pasture
And when those that believed in the Lord were multiplied, and the people of the city heard that a man who was a Jew and a Galilean had entered the city, wishing to overthrow the worship of the idols, their gods, and had persuaded many to abstain from serving them, they sought him everywhere; and they appointed men to watch for him. So when the holy Mark knew that they were conspiring together, he ordained Annianus bishop of Alexandria, and also ordained three priests and seven deacons, |145 and appointed these eleven to serve and to comfort the faithful brethren. But he himself departed from among them, and went to Pentapolis, and remained there two years, preaching and appointing bishops and priests and deacons in all their districts.

Then he returned to Alexandria, and found that the brethren had been strengthened in the faith, and had multiplied by the grace of God, and had found means to build a church in a place called the Cattle-pasture (Τὰ Βουκόλου) near the sea, beside a rock from which stone is hewn. So the holy Mark greatly rejoiced at this; and he fell upon his knees, and blessed God for confirming the servants of the faith, whom he had himself instructed in the doctrines of the Lord Christ, and because they had turned away from the service of idols.

But when those unbelievers learnt that the holy Mark had returned to Alexandria, they were filled with fury on account of the works which the believers in Christ wrought, such as healing the sick, and driving out devils, and loosing the tongues of the dumb, and opening the ears of the deaf, and cleansing the lepers; and they sought for the holy Mark with great fury, but found him not; and they gnashed against him with their teeth in their temples and places of their idols, in wrath, saying : «Do you not see the wickedness of this sorcerer?»

And on the first day of the week, the day of the Easter festival of the Lord Christ, which fell that year on the 29th of Barmudah, when the festival of the idolatrous unbelievers also took place, they sought him with zeal, and found him in the sanctuary. So they rushed forward and seized him, and fastened a rope round his throat, and dragged him along the ground, saying : «Drag the serpent through the cattle-yard! (Σύρωμεν τὸν βούβαλον ἐν τοῖς Βουκόλου) » But the saint, while they dragged him, kept praising God and saying : «Thanks be to thee, O Lord, because thou hast made me worthy to suffer for thy holy name». And his flesh was lacerated, and clove to the stones of the streets; and his blood ran over the ground. So when evening came, they took him to the prison, that they might take counsel how they should put him to death. And at midnight, the doors of the prison being shut, and the gaolers asleep at the doors, behold there was a great earthquake and a mighty tumult. And the angel of the Lord descended from heaven, and entered to the saint, and said to him : «O Mark, servant of God, behold thy name is written in the book of life; and thou art numbered among the assembly of the saints, and thy soul shall sing praises with the angels in the heavens; and thy body shall not perish nor cease to exist upon earth». And when he awoke from his sleep, he raised his eyes to heaven, and said : «I thank thee, O my Lord Jesus Christ, and pray thee to receive me to thyself, that I may be happy in thy goodness». And when he had finished these words, he slept again; and the Lord Christ appeared to him in the form in which the disciples knew him, and said to him : «Hail Mark, the evangelist and chosen one!» So the saint said to him : «I thank thee, O my Saviour Jesus Christ, because thou hast made me worthy to suffer for thy holy name». And the Lord and Saviour gave him his salutation, and disappeared from him.

And when he awoke, and morning had come, the multitude assembled, and brought the saint out of the prison, and put a rope again round his neck, and said : «Drag the serpent through the cattle-shed!» And they drew the saint along the ground, while he gave thanks to the Lord Christ, and glorified him, saying : «I render my spirit into thy hands, O my God !» After saying these words, the saint gave up the ghost.

Then the ministers of the unclean idols collected much wood in a place called Angelion, that they might burn the body of the saint there. But by the command of God there was a thick mist and a strong wind., so that the earth trembled; and much rain fell, and many of the people died of fear and terror; and they said : «Verily, Serapis, the idol, has come to seek the man who has been killed this day».
The Martyrdom of Pope Peter (c 311 CE)
Martyrdom of Petros, bishop of Alexandria (BHG 1502a)

Summary (following the chapter divisions of Devos):

§ 1: In the reign of the lawless emperor Diokletianos, there is a great storm and uproar [i. e. persecution of Christians]. At that time a pious and virtuous man, Petros, ascends the episcopal throne of Saint Mark the Evangelist in Alexandria. When his fame reaches the emperor's ears, five so-called tribunes are sent to capture Petros and bring him to Nicomedia.

§ 2: When the tribunes reach Alexandria, they arrest Petros as he is leaving the church after a service. The bishop is calm and goes willingly, adding merely that 'let the will of God be done'. However, seeing their bishop being taken away, the people of Alexandria rise against the tribunes, shouting protests and throwing stones at them. Unable to proceed, the tribunes give orders for the bishop to be held in the local prison while they report back to the emperor. The people pray night and day outside the prison where Petros is held.

§ 3: Diokletianos is greatly angered at these events, and sends the tribunes back with orders to bring him the bishop's head and to strike down any Christians who offer resistance. However, when they attempt to extract Petros from the prison, they are prevented by the people, of all ages and including virgins and monks, who are camped outside and insist unanimously that the bishop will only be removed after they have all been slain first. The tribunes make plans to enter the prison by force and slay any who resist.

§ 4: Having learnt of this, the heretic Areios is frightened that with the removal of Archbishop Petros he will remain excommunicated (which he had been due to his deviant views concerning the Holy Trinity), and, gathering many clerics, begs them to go to the prison to plead with Petros for him to be received back into communion. The clerics, thinking this to be a pious act, duly go to pope Petros and, after kissing his hand, request that Areios' excommunication be lifted.

§ 5: Archbishop Petros, however, upon hearing this raises his hand and affirms that Areios will be eternally severed from the glory of God. All present are frightened and silent, for they understand that Petros has spoken these words out of some kind of revelation [ἐκ πληροφορίας τινος]. Petros then takes two presbyters, Achillas and Alexandros, aside and reveals to them that after his martyrdom, he will be succeeded by Achillas, who in turn will be succeeded by Alexandros. He asks them to not think him unmerciful, since he did not anathematise Areios out of a personal conviction [οὐ ... ἀπ' ἐμαυτοῦ].

§ 6: Petros reveals to the two priests that the previous night he had seen a vision: a twelve-year-old boy, his face glowing with light, wearing a sleeveless (or short-sleeved) tunic (κολόβιον), which was split vertically in two at the front; with his hands the boy held the tunic's halves together, covering his nakedness. Petros cried out, asking 'Lord, who has torn your tunic'? and received the reply 'Areios tore it'. After this, the Lord told Petros not to receive Areios back into communion, and to instruct his successors, Achillas and Alexandros, to do likewise; for Petros himself was to be martyred.

§ 7: Petros reminds his fellow clerics that all his life he had wandered from place to place under harassment by the idol-worshippers, from Mesopotamia and Syria to Phoenicia, Palestine and various islands, writing in secret and encouraging the persecuted Christians. He had worried over the incarcerated bishops Phileas, Hesychios, Pachomios and Theodoros, and wrote them letters of exhortation from Mesopotamia, giving thanks to the Lord when they were martyred. He reminds his audience that until the present day, there had been six-hundred-and-sixty martyrs there (in Alexandria/Egypt?), and of the evils caused by Meletios [sic] of Lycopolis in the Thebaid, who caused a schism in the church.

§ 8: Finally, Petros reveals to Achillas and Alexandros that he is ready to suffer martyrdom, and that they will not see him again in the flesh; his conscience is clean, for he has revealed to them his vision and has given them sufficient instruction for the future. He prophecies that after his death certain clergymen will speak twisted words and will cause another schism like that of Meletios. He also reminds the future bishops of their illustrious forebears on the episcopal throne of Alexandria: of the dangers faced by his immediate predecessor Theonas because of the pagans; of the great Dionysios, who spent time in hiding during the persecutions, and who was also vexed by the heretic Sabellios; of Herakles [sic] and *Demetrios (S01935), who had faced the insanity of Origen, who caused schisms that are still active in the church (καὶ αὐτοῦ σχίσματα βάλλοντος ἐν τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ τὰ ἕως σήμερον ταραχὰς αὐτῇ ἐπεγείροντα); of all the bishops before them, and of their labours in caring for the church of Christ. Finally, he entrusts his successors to the hands of God.

§ 9: Petros prays and says goodbye to Achillas and Alexandros, who weep at the thought of not seeing him again in the flesh. The archbishop then speaks words of encouragement to the rest of the clergy and the laity, and dismisses them with a prayer. Taking their leave, Achillas and Alexandros reveal in secret Petros' words to the sincere among the clergy; it is generally recognised that his words against Areios must be due to divine revelation. The wicked Areios, however, keeps up his pretence, hoping to influence Achillas and Alexandros.

§ 10: After learning of the tribunes' plan to extract him through force, Petros, fearing a bloodbath, concocts a plan to surrender himself and spare the crowd. He sends a secret message to the tribunes, inviting them to come at night to the southern wall of the prison (away from the door where the people hold watch), and promising to signal to them his location by knocking from the inside; the tribunes will then be able to dig a hole in the wall and take the archbishop away without anyone being the wiser. The plan is executed successfully, with the help of a strong winter wind that miraculously starts to blow in the night, masking the sound of the wall being cut open. Thus Petros surrenders himself like a good shepherd, in order to save his flock.

§ 11: When the tribunes reach the place called 'Cowherd's Place' (ta Boukolou, τὰ Βουκόλου), where saint Mark the Evangelist had suffered martyrdom, they are seized with fright by Petros' unnerving bravery in the face of death. When he requests a little time in order to enter the tomb (ἐν τῷ τάφῳ) of Saint Mark and pray, they grant his wish provided that he not delay.

§ 12: After Petros descends (κατελθὼν) into the tomb and embraces Saint Mark's grave (τὸν τάφον), he sees the Evangelist in front of him as though sitting there and speaking to him. He prays to the saint, calling him first bishop of the throne [of Alexandria], who preached the Gospel to all Egypt and the boundaries of the city, and finally achieved the crown of martyrdom. He enumerates the Evangelist's successors: 'Anianos ... Melios and so on, then Demetrios and Herakles, and after them Dionysios and Maximos and blissful Theonas, who raised me'. He asks the saint to pray for him to complete his martyrdom with unwavering heart. He commends his flock to the saint, who had originally entrusted it to his predecessors.

§ 13: Rising to his feet, Petros lifts his hands heavenwards and prays for God to end the persecution and to make his martyrdom its 'seal'. Meanwhile, a holy virgin living a life of ascetic seclusion in her own villa (προάστειον) near the tomb of Saint Mark, hears a voice from the heavens saying 'Petros the beginning of the apostles, Petros the end of the martyrs'. Having finished his prayer and kissed the tombs of saint Mark and the other holy bishops buried there in front of him, Petros comes up from the tomb. The tribunes, seeing his face radiant like that of an angel, are too afraid to speak to him. At the same time, an old man and an old virgin woman happen to pass by on their way to sell their wares – skins and cloth – in the city. Petros realises this is God's plan, makes the sign of the cross and, questioning them, learns they are Christians and on their way to the city. He asks them to wait a little, and they oblige him, recognising at once their archbishop in the morning light.

§ 14: Petros tells the tribunes to perform their task while it is still morning. They take him to the valley where the tombs are, 'south of' (ἐκ νότου BHG 1502a, spelled νώτου in BHG 1502) the martyrium of saint Mark. The archbishop tells the old man to stretch the skins and cloths out upon the ground. He then steps on top of them, turns towards the east, kneels thrice and lifts his hands to the sky, thanks God and makes the sign of the cross and bares his neck to the sword, urging the tribunes to do their duty. The tribunes, however, are frightened and none of them dares lay a hand on the saint. They finally agree to give each five gold pieces so that the one who dares to do the deed will take the gold. One of them lays out twenty-five gold coins, giving the twenty as a loan to his comrades. Finally, one is selected by lot for 'the lot of Judas', and cuts off the archbishop's head on 25 November (BHG 1502 adds the Egyptian date, 29 Athyr). The killer taking the gold, they all flee, fearing the crowd. The body remains in place, standing upright, for hours before the crowd guarding the prison is informed.

§ 15: When the people camped at the prison entrance learn of the events, they run to the place and find the old man and woman guarding the body. They lay it down upon the sheets of cloth as though on a bed and wipe off the blood, weeping. All the people of the city mourn. The 'first citizens' (οἱ πρῶτοι τῆς πόλεως) wrap the body in the skins and secure it, because the people have started ripping off bits of Petros' episcopal garments, threatening to leave the body bare.§ 16: There is a great uproar as the people are divided into two factions, the one wanting to take the martyr's body to the 'Place of Theonas' (τὰ Θεωνᾶ) [presumably indicating the church of Theonas, for which see Discussion] where he had been raised, the other insisting that he be buried at Saint Mark's where he had been martyred. Fearing a conflict, certain people belonging to the first faction (called 'of the Dromos', οἱ τοῦ Δρόμου) snatch the body and take it away on a boat past the Pharos, through the so-called Leucas, and bring it to the cemetery which Petros himself had built in the western suburbs. Even so, the mourning crowd which now flocks to the cemetery will not allow them to bury the martyr before they have first brought him into the church [lit. to the holy altar, ἐν τῷ ἁγίῳ θυσιαστηρίῳ] and seated him upon his own throne as though he were alive.§ 17: The people had the following reason for doing this. For some time, the archbishop had not sat upon his throne during the liturgy, but would ascend as far as the podium of the throne, say his blessings, and then sit on the footstool of the throne. The people resented this, and on one occasion had become angry and shouted at him to sit on his throne. The archbishop had then managed to persuade the people to calm down, and had once again sat on the footstool. Afterwards he had rebuked the clergy for taking the people's side in trying to persuade him to sit on the throne, and revealed to them that the reason for his strange behaviour was that he could see an ineffable force, resembling light, upon the throne, and, fearful of sitting there himself, would sit on the footstool as a compromise.§ 18: Thus, on this occasion, the priesthood dons the vestments of their rank and seats the martyr's body upon the throne; and afterwards the entire congregation addresses the martyr, saying that, even if in life he had not wished to sit upon the throne, now when consummated with Christ he has finally sat on it even if unwilling. They then ask him, the 'holy Pope of God' (ἅγιε τοῦ θεοῦ πάπα) to act as intercessor on their behalf. After this, the bishops take holy (ὅσιον) Achillas, make him stand close to the throne, and put the martyr's omophorion on his shoulders. Achillas gives an encomiastic speech in honour of the hieromartyr Petros, and then proceeds to perform his burial rites. The people bring linen and silk cloths and perfumes, and they bury the martyr with all honours in the cemetery which he himself had built. Even until today many miracles (σημεῖα, 'signs') take place there by the grace of Christ, for as in life, even more so in death the martyr takes care of his people and intercedes on their behalf with God.Text: Viteau 1897, 69-83 (BHG 1502) and Devos 1965, 162-177 (BHG 1502a). Summary: N. Kälviäinen.

Analysis

The Greek Martyrdom of Petros of Alexandria survives today in two versions, the more concise BHG 1502 and the slightly more extensive BHG 1502a. In the main, the two versions transmit the same text, the differences being seemingly a matter of a more condensed expression in 1502, especially the beginning (§§ 1-3), the content of which is only briefly summarised in BHG 1502. In most cases, BHG 1502a seems 'fuller' and in most if not all cases probably transmits a more original text (one likely explanation being that BHG 1502 has undergone abbreviation at some point), but in any case there are few if any differences in essential details. Our summary is accordingly based on 1502a. For the manuscript tradition of the text, see http://pinakes.irht.cnrs.fr/notices/oeuvre/17548/. There is known to exist a Latin translation of BHG 1502a by Anastasius the Librarian (9th c.), which has been identified by Devos as the text listed as BHL 6698b, while another extant Latin text (BHL 6692-3) is attributed by Devos to Guarimpotus, another 9th c. translator (Devos 1965, 158-159).

The transmission of the Martyrdom in various languages has been studied by Telfer (1949). His comparison of the extant Greek, Latin and Arabic versions enabled him to distinguish two recensions, a 'short' one and a 'long' one, both of which are summarised separately in Arabic by Severus ibn al-Muqaffa, a 10th c. Coptic bishop of Hermopolis (el-Ashmunein). The short recension, which, apart from Severus' summary, is only preserved in the Latin text published by Surius in 1575 (BHL 6696, see Telfer 1949, 119-121) ends with Peter's execution in or at his cell immediately after the executioners have opened the hole in the wall (i.e. it contains §§ 1-10 in Devos' edition and our summary). The long recension, on the other hand, has Peter die only after first visiting the shrine of Saint Mark (§§ 11-14). In addition, the summaries of the long version by Severus and the Copto-Arabic synaxary, as well as the Syriac version, do not include §§ 15-18 (the confusion surrounding the fate of Peter's body and his eventual burial, including the consecration of Achillas as his successor), which are only present in the Greek BHG 1502-1502a and its Latin translation by Anastasius, as well as the Ethiopian version; these last versions, which contain §§ 1-18, are therefore called by Vivian (1988, 66) the 'longest' recension. For an analytic list of all the known versions of the text in different languages, see Vivian 1988, 67-68.

As is evident from our summary, the extant Greek versions BHG 1502-1502a both transmit the longest recension. The main question with respect to the different recensions is, of course, their respective chronological order. According to Telfer's analysis, the short recension must be considered the more original form of the Martyrdom due to its greater historical accuracy, whereas the longer version (or versions, as per Vivian) is due to a later redactor(s) seeking to embellish the legend and supplement it by the addition of local Alexandrian traditions, such as tying Peter's martyrdom to the cult of Saint Mark the Evangelist (Telfer 1949, 118-122 and Vivian 1988, 66-68). Telfer argues that the hagiographer who composed the original Martyrdom had recourse to a historical source which supplied him with information about past bishops of Alexandria. He identifies this source with the so-called 'Jubilee book', a historical work composed in 368 to celebrate the fortieth anniversary of Athanasius I as bishop of Alexandria, and proposes that it was later used, in Latin translation, by Anastasius the Librarian who drew on it for further information to add to his above-mentioned translation of the Martyrdom of Peter (Telfer 1949, 117-118 and 122-130). In his article (1949, 126-130), Telfer collects those sections of the Latin texts of Surius and Anastasius which to him seem most likely to derive from this source, thus giving an idea of its contents, but it must be noted that these are intended by Telfer as fragments of the Latin translation of the 'Jubilee book', not the Martyrdom of Peter, and they do not constitute a 'reconstructed Ur-text' of the latter, as erroneously claimed by Vivian (1988, 65 and 67-70).

Telfer's analysis is persuasive at least as far as the fundamental point about the chronological priority of the short recension is concerned, but has not gone completely unchallenged (see Vivian 1988, 66). The question cannot therefore be considered completely resolved, which makes dating the text even more precarious. A certain terminus ante quem for its composition (including the material only contained in the long version) is provided by the Syriac translation, which survives in a 7th c. manuscript (Telfer 1949, 119; see E0XXXX); Telfer further suggests that the long version predates the Arab invasion (Telfer 1949, 118-119). In addition, the text is quoted by Justinian I in 540 in his Tractate against Origen (Telfer 1949, 119), meaning that the short version at least must derive from the early 6th century or earlier, but probably not before the late 4th (cf. Telfer 1949, 124 n. 1). A more precise date is not possible to establish with certainty, but one might be tempted to connect the phrase about the schisms caused by Origen still causing turmoil in the church (in § 8) with the so-called 'first Origenist crisis' which was a source of unrest in Egypt in 399-403, when the patriarch Theophilus threw his weight behind the anti-Origenist faction amongst the monks, and persecuted the Origenist monks of Nitria. It is not inconceivable that the first version of the text would have been written during these events, or when their memory was still relatively fresh.
DISCUSSION
Although clearly written long after the protagonist's death and not a very reliable source for the events it purports to describe (cf. Vivian 1988, 64), the Martyrdom is an important witness to later cultic practice and the ecclesiastical topography of Alexandria. Peter is presented as praying at the tomb of saint Mark, which is said to be located in Boukolou, a site in the eastern part of the city close to the shore (McKenzie and Reyes 2007, 240; Pearson 1986, 153-154). From the description of this scene in §§ 12-14, it is apparent that the shrine of Saint Mark consisted of a church building, a martyrion (μαρτύριον), inside which there was an entrance to an underground crypt in which were located the 'graves' (τάφος, μνῆμα) of Mark and the past bishops of Alexandria, probably in the form of sarcophagi. To the south of the martyrion there was a valley 'where the tombs are' (εἰς τὴν κοιλάδα ὅπου τὰ μνημεῖα). Cf. also the (possibly 5th century) martyrdom account of Saint *Mark the Evangelist (E06893), which also mentions the church at Boukolou and the preservation of Mark's relics in 'a carved space' (ἐν τόπῳ λελατομευμένῳ, presumably a reference to the same underground crypt visited by Peter).

Another prominent element apparently featured in the text (§§ 16-18) is the 'church of Theonas', his immediate predecessor, which is usually understood to have been located in the western suburbs of Alexandria (McKenzie and Reyes 2007, 240; Pearson 1986, 152). The text is not always entirely explicit about the identification of the various locations referred to, but it is usually assumed (cf. Vivian 1988, 47) that this is the 'place of Theonas' (τὰ Θεωνᾶ), where the faction of the Dromos (a quarter of the city) want to take Peter's body, and the place where it is actually taken when the Dromites finally seize it and take it away by boat. (Since Saint Mark's shrine is to the east of the city, near the sea, the quickest and safest way to transport Peter to a suburb on the other side of the city is of course by boat, past the Pharos island.) The martyr's body is then said to have been taken to a western suburb (εἰς τὸ δυτικὸν τῆς πόλεως μέρος ἐν τοῖς προαστείοις), to a cemetery (κοιμητήριον) which Peter himself had built. However, the people do not allow him to be buried before the ceremony described in §§ 17-18, through which episcopal authority is officially transferred to the new bishop, Achillas, in a (presumably nearby) church which must have been considered the city's cathedral, the official seat of the bishop, since according to the text, Peter's body is seated 'on his own throne' (ἐν τῷ ἰδίῳ θρόνῳ). This is presumably the church of Theonas, and possibly the very church where he is said to have been arrested in the first place, thus completing a geographic as well as a narrative circle. It has also been argued that the description of Peter's funeral and Achillas' consecration as bishop in his stead may to some extent echo actual Alexandrian traditions, at least as far as the transfer of the omophorion to the new bishop is concerned (Vivian 1988, 47-49).
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Editions:
Devos, P., "Une Passion grecque inédite de S. Pierre d'Alexandrie et sa traduction par Anastase le Bibliothécaire", Analecta Bollandiana 83 (1965), 162-187. (BHG 1502a, together with the the 9th cent. Latin translation of Anastasius, BHL 6698b)

Viteau, J., Passions des saints Écaterine et Pierre d'Alexandrie, Barbara et Anysia (Paris 1897), 69-83. (BHG 1502)

Further reading:
McKenzie, J. and Reyes, A.T., "The Churches of Late Antique Alexandria: the Written Sources," in: J. McKenzie, The Architecture of Alexandria and Egypt, c.300 B.C. to A.D. 700 (London, 2007), 240-242.

Pearson, B.A., "Earliest Christianity in Egypt: Some Observations," in: B.A. Pearson and J.B. Goehring (eds.), The Roots of Egyptian Christianity (1986), 132-159.

Telfer, W., "St. Peter of Alexandria and Arius," Analecta Bollandiana 67 (1949), 117-130.

Vivian, T. St. Peter of Alexandria: Bishop and Martyr (Philadelphia, 1988), 40-50 and 64-78 (including English translation).
CONTINUED DESCRIPTION
Secret Alias
Posts: 18922
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: New Evidence for Celsus's True Word Being Written 177 - 180 CE

Post by Secret Alias »

On the location of τὰ Βουκόλου

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baucalis

to as τὰ βουκόλου, the cow pasture, is described only as located “in the eastern district.” Yet Pearson contends that τὰ βουκόλου “was in the first century the very heart of the most prominent Jewish neighbourhood in Alexandria.

The point however is that Boukolou or "Cow Pasture" necessarily has to be the "wild area" outside of the eastern walls of Alexandria:

Image
Secret Alias
Posts: 18922
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: New Evidence for Celsus's True Word Being Written 177 - 180 CE

Post by Secret Alias »

Βουκόλοι 1) Name of the predatory shepherd population in the northwestern part of the Nile delta in the vicinity of Alexandria, on the Herakleotic branch of the Nile, as far asChemmis(Eratosth.nearStrab.XVII 802. 792. Heliod. Aeth. I 5. II 17. 18. VI 2–12 24 Achilles Act III 9–18), also calledἩρακλεοβουκόλοι, probably after the city of Herakleion,Steph. Byz. They differed significantly in appearance, manners and habits from the rest of the Egyptians, just like the cattle herdsmen of the delta in the oldest Egyptian depictions (ErmanEgypt II 583ff.). UnderM. Aurel(172) these B. orBucolici aroused militesa rebellion suppressed only with cunning by Avidius Cassius after Alexandria nearly fell into their hands, Cass. Dio LXXI 4. Hist. Aug. M. Antonin. philos.21; Avid. Cass. 6. After Heliod. aeth. I 5 was the name of the marshy lowland inhabited by them at the mouth of the Herakleotis, which was transformed into a lake by the floodwaters and offered the robbers a safe hiding place, τὰ Βουκόλια , cf. Bucolia Geogr. Rav. III 2. Quatremère Mém. geogr. sur l'Egypte I 232, τὰ τῶν Βουκολίων Chron. Pasch. 471 (Bonn.), τὰ Βουκόλου and Buculus Quatremèreloc. cit. Heliodorus and Achilles Tatius mention Βῆσσα and Νίκωχις as the main places of the B. (sd). Robber shepherds ( ποιμένες ) also existed in other similarly suitable parts of the delta, such as B. at Pelusion ( Xen. Ephes. III 12), but B. is proven as a name only for the inhabitants of the Βουκόλια in the northwestern delta. One therefore has no right either, only that of Herod. II 17 mentioned, after him artificial mouth of the Nile Βουκολικὸν στόμα , which is apparently named after this area, to be identified with the phatmetic one in the eastern part of the delta, cf. Champollion L'Egypte sous les Pharaons II 15.
Secret Alias
Posts: 18922
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: New Evidence for Celsus's True Word Being Written 177 - 180 CE

Post by Secret Alias »

Βουκόλοι 1) Name of the predatory shepherd population in the northwestern part of the Nile delta in the vicinity of Alexandria, on the Herakleotic branch of the Nile, as far asChemmis(Eratosth.nearStrab.XVII 802. 792. Heliod. Aeth. I 5. II 17. 18. VI 2–12 24 Achilles Act III 9–18), also calledἩρακλεοβουκόλοι, probably after the city of Herakleion,Steph. Byz. They differed significantly in appearance, manners and habits from the rest of the Egyptians, just like the cattle herdsmen of the delta in the oldest Egyptian depictions (ErmanEgypt II 583ff.). UnderM. Aurel(172) these B. orBucolici aroused militesa rebellion suppressed only with cunning by Avidius Cassius after Alexandria nearly fell into their hands, Cass. Dio LXXI 4. Hist. Aug. M. Antonin. philos.21; Avid. Cass. 6. After Heliod. aeth. I 5 was the name of the marshy lowland inhabited by them at the mouth of the Herakleotis, which was transformed into a lake by the floodwaters and offered the robbers a safe hiding place, τὰ Βουκόλια , cf. Bucolia Geogr. Rav. III 2. Quatremère Mém. geogr. sur l'Egypte I 232, τὰ τῶν Βουκολίων Chron. Pasch. 471 (Bonn.), τὰ Βουκόλου and Buculus Quatremèreloc. cit. Heliodorus and Achilles Tatius mention Βῆσσα and Νίκωχις as the main places of the B. (sd). Robber shepherds ( ποιμένες ) also existed in other similarly suitable parts of the delta, such as B. at Pelusion ( Xen. Ephes. III 12), but B. is proven as a name only for the inhabitants of the Βουκόλια in the northwestern delta. One therefore has no right either, only that of Herod. II 17 mentioned, after him artificial mouth of the Nile Βουκολικὸν στόμα , which is apparently named after this area, to be identified with the phatmetic one in the eastern part of the delta, cf. Champollion L'Egypte sous les Pharaons II 15.

The Herakleotic branch is the equivalent of Canopic branch:

Image

Canopus (Coptic: Ⲕⲁⲛⲱⲡⲟⲥ, Kanopos; Greek: Κάνωπος, Kanōpos), also known as Canobus (Greek: Κάνωβος, Kanōbos),[1] was an ancient Egyptian coastal town, located in the Nile Delta. Its site is in the eastern outskirts of modern-day Alexandria, around 25 kilometers (16 mi) from the center of that city. Canopus was the site of a temple to the Egyptian god Serapis.
Secret Alias
Posts: 18922
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: New Evidence for Celsus's True Word Being Written 177 - 180 CE

Post by Secret Alias »

Herodotus says this:

For the Nile, beginning from the Cataracts, divides Egypt into two parts as it flows to the sea. Now, as far as the city Cercasorus the Nile flows in one channel, but after that it parts into three. But if we follow the belief of the Greeks, we shall consider all Egypt commencing from the Cataracts (Καταδούπων) and the city of Elephantine to be divided into two parts, and to claim both the names, the one a part of Libya and the other of Asia. One of these, which is called the Pelusian mouth, flows east; the second flows west, and is called the Canobic mouth (Κανωβικὸν στόμα). But the direct channel of the Nile, when the river in its downward course reaches the apex of the Delta, flows thereafter clean through the middle of the Delta into the sea; in this is seen the greatest and most famous part of its waters, and it is called the Sebennytic mouth. There are also two channels which separate themselves from the Sebennytic and so flow into the sea: by name, the Saïtic and the Mendesian. The Bolbitine mouth (Βολβίτινον στόμα) and Bucolic (Βουκολικὸν) are not natural mouths (οὐκ ἰθαγενέα στόματα) but excavated channels.

Apparently the Bolbotine was at Rosetta Egypt - Lower Egypt (L) - provincia: Aegyptus - located in the western Delta, near L07? Rosetta (TM Geo 2059) - cf. L Bolbitine (TM Geo 3838)

Strabo Geography:

It is chiefly, however, the Canobic mouth that they used as an emporium, since the harbours at Alexandria were kept closed,1 as I have said before. After the Bolbitine mouth one comes to a low and sandy promontory which projects rather far into the sea (μάλιστα μέντοι τῷ Κανωβικῷ στόματι ἐχρῶντο ὡς ἐμπορίῳ); it is called Agnu-Ceras. (https://topostext.org/place/314304UPer)2 And then to the Watch-tower of Perseus3 and the Wall of the Milesians; for in the time of Psammitichus (who lived in the time of Cyaxares the Mede) the Milesians, with thirty ships, put in at the Bolbitine mouth, and then, disembarking, fortified with a wall the above-mentioned settlement; but in time they sailed up into the Saïtic Nome, defeated the city Inaros in a naval fight, and founded Naucratis, not far above Schedia. After the Wall of the Milesians, as one proceeds towards the Sebennytic mouth, one comes to two lakes, one of which, Buticê, has its name from the city Butus, and also to the Sebennytic city, and to Saïs, the metropolis of the lower country, in which Athena is worshipped; and in her temple lies the tomb of Psammitichus. In the neighbourhood of Butus is also an Hermupolis,4 which is situated on an island; and in Butus there is an oracle of Leto

The seven estuaries known to the ancients, were:— 1. The Canojiic mouth, eorrespoiidiiig to the present outlet from the Lake Etko, or, according to others, that of the Lake of Aboukir or IMaadee; but it is probable that, at one time, it had communications with tlie sea at both these places. 2. The Bolbitinc mouth at Hosetta. 3. The Selienitic, probably the opening into the present Lake Burlos. 4. The Pliatnitie or Bucolic at Damietta. 5. The Mendesian, which is lost in the Lake Menzaleh, the mouth of which is represented by that of Debeh. 6. The Tanitic or Saitie, which seems to
have loft some traces of its termination eastward of the Lake Menzaleh, under the modem appellation of Om-Faridj6. The branch of the Nile whidi conveyed its waters to the sea, corresponds to the canal of Moez, which now loses itself in the lake. 7. The Pelusiac, which seems to be represented by what is now the most easterly mouth of Lake Menzaleh, where the ruins of Pclusium are still visible
User avatar
billd89
Posts: 1410
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2020 6:27 pm
Location: New England, USA

eorrespoiidiiig? Naucratis, Phoning It In to the Coast

Post by billd89 »

https://greekreporter.com/2024/02/11/na ... ony-egypt/
that they may become temperate instead of dissolute [κἂν οἱ ἀληθῶς τυφλώτ τοντες λοιδορῶνται ἡμῖν ὡς τυφλώττουσι καὶ οἱ βουκολοῦντες, εἴτε Ἰουδαῖοι εἴτε Ἕλληνες, τοὺς συγκατατιθεμένους αὐτοῖς ἡμῖν ἐγκαλῶσιν ὡς βουκολοῦσι τοὺς ἀνθρώπους· καλήν γε βουκόλησιν] or at least may make advances to temperance
Sober what? Cattle what? Philo's DVC 36 addresses such a temperate place. That's where the Jewish A. A. lived: near Plinthine.
User avatar
Peter Kirby
Site Admin
Posts: 8619
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 2:13 pm
Location: Santa Clara
Contact:

Re: New Evidence for Celsus's True Word Being Written 177 - 180 CE

Post by Peter Kirby »

Secret Alias wrote: Wed Dec 21, 2022 12:36 pm a 175 - 180 CE dating for Celsus and his True Word
It's also widely believed that the concern over barbarians (and Christians perceived negatively in this regard by angering the gods and/or even refusing to serve in the military) in the text reflects the Marcomannic Wars (ca. 166-180).

I think this is widely acknowledged. My website set the date at approximately 177 or 178 CE.

https://www.earlychristianwritings.com/celsus.html
StephenGoranson
Posts: 2608
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2015 2:10 am

Re: New Evidence for Celsus's True Word Being Written 177 - 180 CE

Post by StephenGoranson »

The book discussed in Jewish Texts and History section,
The sources of Celsus's criticism of Jesus: Theological developments in the second century AD,
Tijsseling, Egge, author
Leuven ; Bristol, CT: Peeters, 2022,
fwiw, suggests that Celsus drew on a Jewish text that he, E.T., dates between c.105-130.
Post Reply