Dura Europos

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
User avatar
Leucius Charinus
Posts: 2817
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 4:23 pm
Location: memoriae damnatio

Re: Dura Europos

Post by Leucius Charinus »

StephenGoranson wrote: Wed Sep 28, 2022 4:43 amThen, Pete, grace us with your proposed different translations from the Greek.
This has been provided a number of times.
The Runes of Christ at Dura Europos
https://www.academia.edu/38115589/The_R ... ra_Europos

The Two Key Graffiti

The two key graffiti are discussed below. The paradigm that these certainly contain Christian nomina sacra is challenged. Alternative interpretations based on known abbreviations in Greek inscriptions are presented. [4] A third graffito “To God in heaven” fails to exhibit the abbreviated Christian form of god or heaven.


The Sisaeus Graffito: ΤΟΝ ΧΡΙC ΜΝΗCΚΕCΤΕ CΙCΕΟΝ TON ΤAΠΙΝΟΝ

This contains the Greek abbreviation XPIC – taken by Yale to represent “Christ”. Yale’s final report relates that “The writer here uses the usual instead of the Christian form of the abbreviation of the holy name.” [5] Χρισ[τον]. However there are some as ́ yet unconsidered other alternatives:

XPIC as XPIC(TES) a “usual” [6] abbreviation of Χρίστης – Χρίσ[της] - one who colors with whitewash, a whitewasher or stucco-maker. No other examples of this abbreviation appear to have been preserved from antiquity. But then again, very few painted murals have survived. In this alternative, Sisaeus the humble wished to be remembered as the stucco-maker and tradesman.

[ETA: Hence the interesting observation from an article you earlier cited: 1963 by R. de Buisson - "L'inscriptions de la niche centrale de la synagogue de Doura-Europos" (Syria 40)
which argues that one artist worked at both the church house and the synagogue. The footnote says: "He claims that two inscriptions in the two buildings refer to the same man (supposedly named Sisa or Siseos)"

A second alternative is based upon existing epigraphic evidence. On other Greek inscriptions XP has been identified as an abbreviation for χρόνος (chrónos - 1.time; 2.year) [7], and IC has been identified as sixteen 16 [8] In this alternative, the inscription is in memory of Sisaeus the humble, resident for, or aged, 16 years. There are indications that Sisaeus may have been a Jewish name.[9]


The Proclus Graffito: ΤΟΝ ΧΝ ΙΝ ΥΜΕΙΝ ΜΝ[Η]CΚΕC[ΘΕ] [ΠΡ]ΟΚΛΟΥ

Yale have provided two different possible alternatives here. The first alternative was that “XN IN” represents “Christ Jesus”. [10] [“Christ Jesus remember Proclus”] The second alternative provided was that the “IN” was not “Jesus” but be translated as “within yourselves”.[“Remind Christ of Proclus among yourselves.”] However there are some as yet unconsidered other alternatives:

On other Greek inscriptions X has been identified as an abbreviation [11] for:

χάρις .... beauty, grace, goodwill 1.(Judaism, Christianity) The grace or favor of God.
χρηστός ..... (khrēstós) 1.good, useful
χρόνος .... • (chrónos)
χρυσά • (chrysá) = 1.neuter plural form of χρυσός (chrysós) gold
χώρᾱ • (khᾱrā) 1.location, place, spot; 2.the proper place; 3.one's place in life;

And N has been identified as an abbreviation [12] for:

νίκα ...... (nika) I conquer, am victorious, overcome, prevail, subdue.
Νικάτωρ ....... victor
νικητής ..... (nikitís) -.winner, victor

Alternatives therefore may be listed as:

The grace of the victor in yourselves;
the good victor in yourselves;
the golden victor in yourselves;
the place or time of the victor in yourselves
– remember Proclus.

This alternative appears strengthened by the fact that the inscription is cut into the border above the mural of David and Goliath (both of whom are explicitly captioned). David is about to claim victory by beheading Goliath.


Footnotes:

[4] Data from Michael Avi-Yonah, Abbreviations in Greek Inscriptions, Quarterly of the Department of Antiquities in Palestine (Jerusalem: Government of Palestine, 1940) As reprinted in Abbreviations in Greek Inscriptions Al. N. Oikonomides, Professor of Classics Loyola University Chicargo. Illinois, ARES Publishing 1974.

[5] Final Report, p.95

[6] Meaning the first four letters of either Christos or Whitewasher

[7] Ibid p. 112

[8] Ibid p.73

[9] Final Report, p.95 “The name Sisaeus occurs in one of the Dura accounts (P.Dura 47, 3) .... [and] is known as a Jewish name from Josephus, who reports in Ant. Jud. VII, v, 4, 110 that David made a man of this name his secretary.

[10] Preliminary Report, p.241-2

[11] Ibid p.110

[12] Ibid p.87

StephenGoranson
Posts: 2308
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2015 2:10 am

Re: Dura Europos

Post by StephenGoranson »

Your "alternative" translations are unconvincing.
The case for D-E Christianity is cumulative. Not riding on whether you can imagine an attempt at deflection to obscure selected portions, ignoring others.
Again, I ask, how do you, Pete, interpret the painting usually described as Peter attempting to walk on water?
User avatar
Leucius Charinus
Posts: 2817
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 4:23 pm
Location: memoriae damnatio

Re: Dura Europos

Post by Leucius Charinus »

StephenGoranson wrote: Wed Sep 28, 2022 4:43 am So, Pete, your defense of no Christian church in Dura-Europos now additionally requires the charge that Prof. Welles, Yale classicist, Greek specialist, founder of the American Society of Papyrologists, faked part of two inscriptions. That others at Yale could check.
The facts remain:
1) On p.241 of the Preliminary Report Hopkins depicts the graffiti without overbars.
2) He states there are photographs from 1932. Where are they?
3) At the conclusion of the report he states "perhaps short inscriptions don't need overbars.
4) The overbars appear on the Final Report.

What does this suggest to you?

OTOH if the overbars never existed can the supposed "nomina sacra" in the Greek abbreviations XN IN" and "XPIC" be explained as profane abbreviations drawn from a database of abbreviations used in Greek inscriptions? My opinion is that they can.
StephenGoranson wrote: Fri Sep 30, 2022 5:20 am Your "alternative" translations are unconvincing.
Clearly the "alternative" translations are being drawn from a cited and convincing source. So areason or two for your assessment could be useful.
User avatar
Ken Olson
Posts: 1277
Joined: Fri May 09, 2014 9:26 am

Re: Dura Europos

Post by Ken Olson »

StephenGoranson wrote: Fri Sep 30, 2022 5:20 am Again, I ask, how do you, Pete, interpret the painting usually described as Peter attempting to walk on water?
This question seems to remain unanswered.
Dura-Europos - Baptistery_wall_painting_Christ_Walking_on_Water.jpeg
Dura-Europos - Baptistery_wall_painting_Christ_Walking_on_Water.jpeg (129.02 KiB) Viewed 593 times
Best,

Ken
User avatar
Leucius Charinus
Posts: 2817
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 4:23 pm
Location: memoriae damnatio

Re: Dura Europos

Post by Leucius Charinus »

The historical existence of Jewish mural wall art was unknown prior to November 1932. Had Hopkins discovered the Jewish synagogue murals at Dura prior to the his discovery of the murals in the church house, Hopkins would have considered that the mural of David and Goliath could have been Jewish. But this never entered his head in January 1932.

In the mind of Clark Hopkins because the Jewish culture did not produce mural wall art then with respect to the mural art of David and Goliath there was only one other possibility. The mural must have been Christian. Viola !!

StephenGoranson wrote: Fri Sep 30, 2022 5:20 am Again, I ask, how do you, Pete, interpret the painting usually described as Peter attempting to walk on water?
I interpret the church house to be Jewish and that the murals probably relate to the life of King David not to the life of Jesus. With the exception of David and Goliath (who are explicitly identified by name on the mural) I reject the proposition that any great degree of certainty can be ascribed to what the ultimate subjects of each mural may have been.

Biblical scholars see Jesus in these mural scenes in the same way as other people see Jesus on their toast. It's called confirmation bias.
StephenGoranson
Posts: 2308
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2015 2:10 am

Re: Dura Europos

Post by StephenGoranson »

Tell us how "the murals probably relate to the life of King David." David on water, etc.

Other than the Goliath one. Keeping in mind that Christians read about David in their Bible, but that Jewish Bibles don't include Jesus. (Nor do they usually call their worship place "church" and that they in D-E already had a synagogue nearby, before the house was architecturally-modified.) (And are you a "Biblical scholar" to see David in all these?)

BYT, B.A.R. Aug. 16, 2021:
"THIS FRAGMENTED PARCHMENT was found in an undisturbed context at Dura-Europos, in present-day Syria. It contains Greek gospel text which does not correspond to any one canonical gospel. Rather, it mixes elements of all four. Because we know that Dura-Europos was sacked in A.D. 256, the manuscript must date to that year or earlier."
User avatar
Leucius Charinus
Posts: 2817
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 4:23 pm
Location: memoriae damnatio

Re: Dura Europos

Post by Leucius Charinus »

CONFIRMATION BIAS

I have used this term to describe two issues: 1) the "sure knowledge from the evidence" (prior to NOV 1932) that Jewish culture did not indulge in mural art, and 2) the preferential treatment of the hypothesis that Christian nomina sacra appear in the inscriptions. Despite the fact that it was likely that the overbars were absent, XPIC and XN were announced to represent abbreviated forms of "Christ". Other alternatives were not considered in any of the reports I have read. As far as I know I may be the first person to suggest a profane explanation for the XPIC and XN.

Now this does not mean I am correct and Yale is wrong. I have stressed that readers should understand that I am not claiming that my explanations are certain. All they do is to allow an alternative explanation.


ALTERNATIVE INTERPETATION

I have previously outlined what I would suggest in replacement of the Christian paradigm: the occupants of the dwelling were Jewish. Sisaeus is a Jewish name and is elsewhere recorded at Dura. It was apparently also the name of King David's secretary. The inscription "To God in Heaven" is in alignment with Jewish thought. David and Goliath is a Jewish motif. I would suggest that all the other murals may be interpreted as having Jewish motifs.

I am not a Jewish scholar of the LXX or Hebrew Bible so I offer the following in the spirit of making some educated guesses, all related to the life of King David. Certainty brings insanity. We don't know whether the murals are all or partially religious. We could be looking at local people or local events as subjects. We don't know. IDK.


MURAL ART

1) For example the "paralytic" reclining on a couch may represent King David at the end of his long life. He is known to have been bedridden at the end of his life. He is reclining and someone is carrying a table to him to be prepared with food- a banquet. Have a look at the Dura banquet murals in Block M7

Look at the object being carried. If it is a bed then it is unusually short and his legs would be hanging over the end. The figure above, to quote Clark Hopkins, might represent "God on a cloud". The God of King David.

2) For example the largest and dominant mural in the lower frame is known variously as "Women at the Tomb", "Procession of Women", "Wise and Foolish Virgins", etc. The Christian scholars can't agree which NT scene or event it could possibly be. I would put forward the possibility to interpret this as a procession of women to the luminous tent, surrounded by stars, and containing the Torah Ark. Before being installed in a temple in Jerusalem the Torah Ark was kept by David in a tent. After the disasters of the 1st and 2nd centuries, the Jews were again without a temple, and so was their Torah Ark. Certainly there is no mural depicting a menorah in the house church but there are niches which could have housed a physical menorah which could be variously hidden or removed or exhibited according to the circumstances. Alternatively the procession of women is making its way to the tomb of King David.

3) The "Good Shepherd" featured above the water basin is again a Jewish motif relating to the Shepherd King David. The Shepherd (David, a shepherd anointed by OT God to become King) watering a flock [Samuel]; Also see Kriophoros


4) The water basin (trough) - held by some to represent a Christian "Baptismal font" and by others as relating to a long lost Christian martyr - may be related to Jewish water rituals. Alternatively it might have been used to store water for home industry purposes such as pottery, textiles, food grinding, etc. That the primary rooms of houses were not merely domestic or spaces for reception, but served for home industry purposes is mentioned in HOUSING AND HOUSEHOLDS AT DURA-EUROPOS: A STUDY IN IDENTITY ON ROME’S EASTERN FRONTIER Volume I, Jennifer A. Baird (2006), p.104

5) Peter and Christ a-walking on the water? This could be anything. The water upon which the ship is floating could well have been the Euphrates River immediately below the city of Dura. The figures could be anyone involved with the river transport trade welcoming a newly arrived trader. Another option is a depiction of when David greets Hiram: Brothers in Trade [from Samuel] - the synogogue depicts scenes from Samuel


6) The "woman at the well" is one of David's wives. Or a woman fetching water from a well [Genesis]





OTHER NEGATIVE EVIDENCE

7) All in all we know (because of the synagogue) that Dura hosted a significant Jewish presence. They did not all live in the synagogue but rather they gathered there. In their own private houses they could easily be thought - even expected - to have had their own "religious room" with murals depicting their own flavor of Judaism.

8) I would propose that this house was occupied by Jewish people who were more militaristic than those at the synagogue. They followed the legend of the military victory of their King David (victory by the grace of their god). They could well have been part of the Roman military because the house is directly adjacent to the Secondary Gate.

9) There are two large graffiti in the court - a cataphractarius and a charging clibanarius (Rep. IV, pp. 216 IF.) - these are probably not Christian. They fit well into a military presence next to the secondary gate. These were the heavy infantry. There's good reason - and plenty of evidence - that Jewish people served in the Roman army at Dura.
http://allempires.com/allempires.com-re ... ataphracts

10) Additionally it is reported that there was a discovery of three clay plaques of the mother goddess Atargatis, some of which were close to the door of the chapel. This is negative evidence of a Christian presence.

11) As mentioned earlier the 3rd inscription "To god in heaven" need not be in reference to the Christian god at all, despite the efforts of Biblical scholarship to see it that way. The words "god" and "heaven" are written in full and without abbreviation. Other later Christian inscriptions abbreviate these words in the standard regime of Traube's nomina sacra.

12) Finally from the final report, the "house church" has more abecedaria on its walls than any other building in the city of Dura:
p.126

​"The number of abecedaria found in the Christian building​ is larger than any other structure in the city." [3]​

[3] p.90. Welles counts 6 .... 1.3.4.5.8.11 14 should be added as a 7th.​

Was the building - currently presumed to be a Christian house church - originally a school?



SUMMARY

I'd like to repeat - this does not mean I am correct and Yale is wrong. I have stressed that I am not claiming that my explanations are certain. All the above is designed to allow an exploration of an alternative explanation that the Dura "house church" may not necessarily have housed Christian people but rather Jewish people.

p.7

One is almost embarrassed to have to say
that any statement a historian makes must
be supported by evidence which, according
to ordinary criteria of human judgement,
is adequate to prove the reality of the
statement itself. This has three
consequences:


1) Historians must be prepared to admit
in any given case that they are unable
to reach safe conclusions because the
evidence is insufficient; like judges,
historians must be ready to say 'not proven'.


2) The methods used to ascertain the value
of the evidence must continually be scrutinised
and perfected, because they are essential to
historical research.

3) The historians themselves must be judged
according to their ability to establish facts.

ON PAGANS, JEWS, and CHRISTIANS, Arnaldo Momigliano, 1987
Chapter 1: Biblical Studies and Classical Studies
Simple Reflections upon Historical Method

Like judges, with respect to the Dura "house church"
being either Christian or Jewish,
historians must be ready to say 'not proven'


This is my position at the moment.
StephenGoranson
Posts: 2308
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2015 2:10 am

Re: Dura Europos

Post by StephenGoranson »

Hi Pete.
You have offered alternate interpretations, piecemeal. Do they cohere into a whole, integrated interpretation that better accounts for the archaeological evidence than the Christian-place interpretation?
You have offered a skeptical view of the Christian-place interpretation, and you have advocated a skeptical view of history claims.
Yet you have not (that I have read) applied similar skepticism to your unwavering assertion that Constantine invented Christianity.
User avatar
GakuseiDon
Posts: 2295
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2013 5:10 pm

Re: Dura Europos

Post by GakuseiDon »

Leucius Charinus wrote: Sat Oct 01, 2022 6:53 pm5) Peter and Christ a-walking on the water? This could be anything. The water upon which the ship is floating could well have been the Euphrates River immediately below the city of Dura. The figures could be anyone involved with the river transport trade welcoming a newly arrived trader.
Could the mural be Peter and Christ walking on water, with Peter sinking a little and the disciples looking on? It really does look like that. If you look at later drawings, many look the same. In the absence of other evidence, what is the likelihood that it is a picture of Peter and Jesus? I'd say it would be pretty high. As a thought experiment: if we had a reference class of pictures depicting that scene, I'd say that the overwhelming majority would be those of the Christian scene. Eg. compare with the mural above:

Image

I looked on your website on your page on Duras Europos here: http://mountainman.com.au/essenes/article_072.htm

You wrote:

It is not unreasonable to consider that both the manuscript and the graffiti (if indeed they are christian) could have been introduced to the city at a much later date, by unknown fringe desert dwellers, seeking shelter in a desolation. Another possibility is outlined below...

We are told by the historians Ammianus (23.5.1-15) and Zosimus (3.14.2) that the Roman army lead by Julian (the Apostate) travelled to the region called Zaitha (or Zautha [Zosimus]) near the abandoned town of Dura where they visted the tomb of the emperor Gordian. This was Julian's final campaign, and he was accompanied by the entire army.

Therefore it is entirely possible that post Nicaean literature was deposited in the wall at Dura, and that christian graffiti was scrawled on the walls, during this very brief Roman occupation of the town, for possibly only a few days, in early April of the year 363 CE.

That reads like the explanation of the lawyer: "My client didn't fire the shot because he wasn't there. And if he was there, he didn't have a gun to fire the shot. And if he was there and had a gun, it didn't work."

LC, in your view: were Christian manuscript fragments and Christian grafitti found there? Or at least, in your view what is the likelihood that the writings there were Christian (whether pre- or post-Nicene)?
User avatar
Leucius Charinus
Posts: 2817
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 4:23 pm
Location: memoriae damnatio

Re: Dura Europos

Post by Leucius Charinus »

StephenGoranson wrote: Sun Oct 02, 2022 4:11 am Yet you have not (that I have read) applied similar skepticism to your unwavering assertion that Constantine invented Christianity.
I have unwaveringly asked questions about the primary and secondary evidence (and the way it has been interpreted) supporting the mainstream historical paradigm of Christian origins. Particularly relating to its chronology and specifically about its "terminus ad quem" - latest possible date.
Post Reply