John2 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 28, 2021 3:51 pm
As noted on pages 30-31 of Philip, Apostle and Evangelist, "Eusebius nowhere goes beyond Trajan's time" in EH 3 (in which Papias is discussed) "and in fact still treats this period at the start of book 4" and that "a date before 110 CE for his writing is to be preferred."
There has been a propensity among modern scholars to date Papias' writing during the reign of Hadrian (117-138 GE) or later rather than earlier, although the reasoning behind such estimates is often not spelled out. Eusebius considers Papias in connection with his treatment of Polycarp, Ignatius, and Clement of Rome during the reign of Trajan (98~117 CE). As Vernon Bartlet has pointed out, in the third book of the Historia ecclesiastica, Eusebius nowhere goes beyond Trajan's time, and in fact still treats this period at the start of book four. "Eusebius . . . saw no reason . . . to infer from internal evidence that Papias wrote after rather than before A.D. 110, though he is at pains to refute Irenaeus's statement that Papias was actually 'a hearer and eye-witness of the sacred Apostles.' " Bartlet's view has recently been confirmed by Ulrich Kortner, whose interpretation of the Papias fragments substantiates the early date suggested by Eusebius' relative chronology. Kortner argues persuasively that the polemical function of Papias' work, the Tradentenkreis of the presbyters, and Papias' association with the daughters of Philip are all more suited to a time around 110 than the middle of the second century. Since there is no convincing reason to dispute Papias' contact with the daughters of Philip, a date before 110 CE for his writing is to be preferred, lest we find ourselves constantly rewarding early Christian figures with extraordinary life spans.
Do you dispute that Eusebius "nowhere goes beyond Trajan's time" in the book he discusses Papias? If not, then do you not see that as an indication that Papias wrote no later than Trajan's time?
there are a lot of scholars that buy into the standard* date and then waste 400 pages of ink
Ben C. Smith wrote: ↑Thu Jan 28, 2021 5:11 pm
I have more or less given up on dating Papias absolutely. I mainly focus on dating him relative to other authors and texts.
When do you date Polycarp, Ignatius and Clement of Rome? Just curious.
Ben C. Smith wrote: ↑Thu Jan 28, 2021 5:11 pm
I have more or less given up on dating Papias absolutely. I mainly focus on dating him relative to other authors and texts.
When do you date Polycarp, Ignatius and Clement of Rome? Just curious.
Oh, I never date those dudes. They never call the next morning.
I am not sure about any of them, really. I think that 1 Clement is a composite (we have discussed that before). I go back and forth on which Ignatian epistles, if any, are even genuine. And Polycarp I just plain am not sure about. I tend to date these kinds of texts relative to other texts, not absolutely.
perseusomega9 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 28, 2021 6:29 pm
Do you dispute that Eusebius "nowhere goes beyond Trajan's time" in the book he discusses Papias? If not, then do you not see that as an indication that Papias wrote no later than Trajan's time?
It is most disturbing to me that one would use Eusebius as a credible source to date supposed early Christian writings
What did Eusebius get right about the date and authorship of NT writings?
Dates and authorship of NT writings given by Eusebius in "Church History" have been rejected.
perseusomega9 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 28, 2021 6:29 pm
Do you dispute that Eusebius "nowhere goes beyond Trajan's time" in the book he discusses Papias? If not, then do you not see that as an indication that Papias wrote no later than Trajan's time?
It is most disturbing to me that one would use Eusebius as a credible source to date supposed early Christian writings
What did Eusebius get right about the date and authorship of NT writings?
Dates and authorship of NT writings given by Eusebius in "Church History" have been rejected.
It doesn't disturb me to take into account the chronology of someone who had access to Papias' writings. And as far as the NT goes, what are some examples of what you think Eusebius got wrong about the date and authorship of NT writings?
John2 wrote: ↑Fri Jan 29, 2021 6:49 pm
It doesn't disturb me to take into account the chronology of someone who had access to Papias' writings. And as far as the NT goes, what are some examples of what you think Eusebius got wrong about the date and authorship of NT writings?
How do you know what Eusebius really had access to?
John2 wrote: ↑Fri Jan 29, 2021 6:49 pm
It doesn't disturb me to take into account the chronology of someone who had access to Papias' writings. And as far as the NT goes, what are some examples of what you think Eusebius got wrong about the date and authorship of NT writings?
How do you know what Eusebius really had access to?
I know that he appears to have had access to Papias, e.g., EH 3.39.1-2:
1. There are extant five books of Papias, which bear the title Expositions of Oracles of the Lord. Irenæus makes mention of these as the only works written by him, in the following words: These things are attested by Papias, an ancient man who was a hearer of John and a companion of Polycarp, in his fourth book. For five books have been written by him. These are the words of Irenæus.
2. But Papias himself in the preface to his discourses by no means declares that he was himself a hearer and eye-witness of the holy apostles, but he shows by the words which he uses that he received the doctrines of the faith from those who were their friends.
