175 This calls into question early form-critical studies that supposed that the tradition " s tendency was nearly always expansive; see Sanders, Tendencies, 19,46–87, 88–189,272; cf. Stein, ««Criteria,»» 238–40. Even oracles, which were considered divine utterances, could be expanded; see Aune, Prophecy, 58. 180   Progymn. 3.224–240. In Progymn. 2.115–123, Theon compares elaborations in earlier historical sources. Elaboration (εργασα) was especially useful for rebuttal (Progymn. 1.172–175). 182 Theon Progymn. 5.39–43, 52–53; Phaedrus 2.pro1.l2–13; 3, epi1. 8–9; 4, epi1.7–9; Philostratus Hrk. 29.6; in speeches, e.g., Diogenes Laertius 7.1.20; Dionysius of Halicarnassus Thucyd. 55; Demosth. 18, 20, 24; Lysias 5; Philostratus Vit. soph. 2.4.569. One could, however, be too brief at times (Phaedrus 3.10.59–60; Dionysius of Halicarnassus 2 Amm. 2). 183 In Jewish sources, cf., e.g., " Abot R. Nat. 7, §21 Β (for a pseudonymous claim to have personally witnessed something that earlier tradition simply reports). For a halakic example, cf. Hoenig, «Kinds of Labor.» Amplification and embellishment are thus more characteristic of the apocryphal gospels (Carmignac, «Pré-pascal»). 184 Cf. Blomberg, «Thomas,» 195, especially on the Gospel of Thomas (in which additions primarily reflect gnostic themes, but which was especially abbreviated to streamline, as were Matthew and Mark). 185 Theon Progymn. 4.73–79, on adding narrative to a fable or the reverse (although the narrative is added as a parallel, not as a setting, for the fable). Authors could add maxims to narratives (Progymn. 5.388–425) or combine preexisting narratives to relate two or more of them at once (5.427–441). The alternative to combining narratives was simply to relate them in episodic fashion, as Mark sometimes does; this was acceptable for most readers, if not according to the highest literary fashions (Drury, Design, 30; cf. Smith, Magician, 109). 186 Quintilian 9.2.60–61. Cf. the discussion of catchwords in Gerhardsson, Memory, 145–49, 153; in the Gospels, cf. Bultmann, Tradition, 325–26.

http://azbyka.ru/otechnik/world/the-gosp...

8755 Both expansion (cf., e.g., Theon Progym. 1.172–175; 2.115–123; 3.224–240) and abridgement (2Macc 2:24–28) were standard practices; see our comments on pp. 18–19, 27–28. Post-Easter embellishment becomes far more common in the apocryphal gospels than in the Synoptics (see Carmignac, «Pré-pascal»); Hill, Prophecy, 169, thus is right to observe that the Johannine discourses «may indeed be homilies composed around sayings of Jesus,» without being from Christian prophets. 8756 Many scholars emphasize the centrality of the Word and the Jesus tradition here; see Bürge, Community, 213; Dietzfelbinger, «Paraklet,» 395–402; for the reason for this emphasis, Dietzfel-binger, «Paraklet,» 402–8. Cf. the importance of authentic memory of the right Teacher in the Scrolls (Stuhlmacher, «Theme,» 13; cf. Roloff, «Lieblingsjünger,» whom he cites). 8762 Berg, «Pneumatology,» 149–50. This is likely however one interprets the phrase. On acting in onés name, see discussion at 14:13. 8764 Franck, Revelation, 44, points out that in Philo it is normally God or his Word or Moses who «teaches.» Wegenast, «Teach,» 760, observes that the term is normally used in the LXX for instruction in how to live the Torah, not for prophetic preaching. 8765 E.g., m. " Abot 3:8; Met Pisha 1:135–136; Sipre Deut. 4.2.1; 48.1.1,4; 306.19.1–3; p. Meg. 4:1, §4; cf. Let. Aris. 154 (Hadas, Aristeas, 161, also compares Philo Spec. Laws 4.106ff). See comments on memory in our introduction; cf. in pre-Christian sapiential testaments, such as Tob 4(perhaps Tob 1:11–12). 8766 Rhet. ad Herenn. 3.16.28; Plutarch Educ. 13, Mor. 9E; Diogenes Laertius 6.2.31; 10.1.12; Theon Progym. 2.5–8; Quintilian 1.3.1; 2.4.15; 11.2.1–51; probably Seneca Dia1. 7.10.3; Culpepper, School, 50, 106, 193; Anderson, Glossary, 126–27; Kennedy, Classical Rhetoric, 98; Gerhardsson, Memory, 124–25. Understanding and remembering profitable sayings were both vital (Isocrates Demon. 18, Or. 1), and reminder was common enough in moral exhortation (Isocrates Demon. 21, Or. 1; Epictetus Diatr. 4.4.29; Phil 3:1 ; 2Рет 1:12 ; cf. Cicero Amic. 22.85; Rom 15:15 ). Note taking was, of course, practiced; cf. Diogenes Laertius 2.48; Epictetus Diatr. 1.pref; Quintilian 1.pref.7–8; introduction to Plutarch Stoic Cont. 13:369–603, in LCL 398–99.

http://azbyka.ru/otechnik/world/the-gosp...

8768 In Jub. 32:25–26, Jacob receives divine help to «remember» an inspired dream (Charles, Jubilees, lxxxiii, also notes the parallel); PGM 4.726–731 likewise promises Mithras " s help to recall a lengthy revelation. 8769 This can be argued on analogy with Matt 28:19, which probably invites the disciple makers to use the teaching blocs in Matthew catechetically. 8770 This is often argued; e.g., Dietzfelbinger, «Paraklet,» 389–408. Franck, Revelation, 96, suggests that the connection between Paraclete and beloved disciple guarantees that disciple as an inspired transmitter of tradition. See introduction, ch. 3, esp. pp. 111–22. 8771 Sasse, «Paraklet,» 260–77; Culpepper, School, 266–69; Boring, Sayings, 49; Kragerund, Lieblingsjünger, 113–29 and passim. Boismard, «Review,» critiques Kragerund " s identification of the beloved disciple with the Paraclete instead of with an idealized disciple figure. Much more cautious is Wilckens, «Paraclete,» 203; they are not identical, but the beloved disciple represents the community that the Paraclete has founded. 8773 Smith, Johannine Christianity, 30. This view is shared by Aune, Eschatology, 101; Boring, Sayings, 8 (on Dibelius), 49 (with a list of other scholars), 76,85,106–7,127; Hays, Vision, 151. Boring sees this as something of a charismatic exegesis of Jesus as well as of the OT (p. 102). 8774 Oracle collections did indeed exist in antiquity, e.g., the Sibylline Oracles. See Collins, Sibylline Oracles, 6–7; Aune, Prophecy, 44. An oracle (χρησμς) was sometimes circulated (e.g., Achilles Tatius 2.14.1) by itself, although the scantiness of the evidence for this suggests that it was not a common practice. 8775 Even though skillful writers knew how to join sayings with narrative (Theon Progym. 5.388–425; cf. 4.73–79; 5.427–441) and both premeditation (Quintilian 10.6.1–2, 5) and a rough draft (Aune, Environment, 128) would permit the writer to prepare and relate material carefully. Arrian seems to impose more of his own grid on the Epictetus material in his more highly organized Enchiridion than in his Diatribai, but writers had a greater degree of freedom then than we would normally permit in biography today (Theon Progym. 1.93–171), as attested by tradition variants (cf. the tortures in 2 and 4 Macc [OTP2:555; but probably 4 Maccabees diverged more from its antecedents]; Epictetus Diatr. 1.9.23–25 vs. Plato Apo1. 29C, 28E), although some of these could have arisen from conflation of similar sayings or events (e.g., p. B. Qam. 2:6, §3).

http://azbyka.ru/otechnik/world/the-gosp...

318 Though Mack, Lost Gospel, 6, appeals to the massive number of agrapha, most appear in late documents, and even the small number of agrapha accepted by Jeremias are at most possibly authentic (Meier, Marginal Jew, 1:113). Our very inability to distinguish accurate and inaccurate agrapha underlines the value of our earlier written documents (Hofius, «Sayings»). 319 Jeremias, Sayings, 26–28; on Thomas, cf. ibid., 18; Stanton, Gospels, 129; Chilton, «Thomas,» 171; Blomberg, «Thomas,» 195–196; idem, «Where,» 24; Wright, People of God, 437–43. See Stanton, Jesus, 129–35, who addresses very significant contrasts between the canonical gospels and the Gospel of Thomas (which itself is closer to our canonical samples than other Nag Hammadi material is). 320 Possibly including the Gospel of the Nazarenes (P. Vielhauer in Hennecke, Apocrypha, 1:144), though this may be a secondary expansion of Matthew into Aramaic (Meier, Marginal Jew, 1:116). 321 Talbert, Gospel, 8–9. Later Koester came to view the canonical gospels as «aretalogical biographies.» On the assumption that Q was purely a sayings gospel, others have compared it to Thomas; see, e.g., Mack, Lost Gospel, 182; but cf. Keener, «Critique.» 322 That " Abot and wisdom literature share the same rhetorical forms (Gottlieb, «Abot») supports the likelihood that early sages like Jesus spoke and were understood in part as wisdom teachers. 323 Kelber, Gospel, 199–211; Boring, Sayings, 201–3, provide examples of this approach; contrast Gundry, «Genre,» 103–7. Of course, even the related proposal that «Q» is entirely a sayings source with no narrative is highly questionable; that the narrative passages in Matt 3:1–12/ Lk 3:2–14 and Matt 8:5–10/ Lk 7:1–10 occur at the same junctures in their respective narratives (the second immediately following Jesus» sermon on the mount/plain) indicates a sequential (hence also written and not just oral) tradition at these points (cf., e.g., Theissen, Gospels, 226). 324 Besides the sayings-chreiai and action-chreiai were mixed chreiai, including both sayings and action (Theon Progymn. 3.22–23); sayings-chreiai also could include both statement and response (Progymn. 3.27–28). Sayings could also be reported from separate sources after narrating a «life,» without implying that the two genres were contradictory (e.g., Plutarch Timoleon 15.1); cf. Philostratus Vit. soph. 2.5.574); most often biographies included both (Valerius Maximus 1.pref.l).

http://azbyka.ru/otechnik/world/the-gosp...

Jesus» phrase «keep my word» (8:51–52, 55; 14:23–24; 15:20; cf. 17:6; Rev 3:8, 10) echoes biblical language for obeying God " s law and word through his prophets. 6914 Never «seeing» death is, of course, idiomatic for never experiencing it (cf. also Luke 2:26; Heb 11:5); 6915 God often allowed the righteous to avoid having to «see» sorrows. 6916 («Taste death» in 8is an equivalent idiom to «see death»; 6917 paraphrase was a standard rhetorical exercise and the rewording is thus not significant–cf. 13:10–11; Theon Progymn. 1.93–171.) A phrase like «not die» could appear in conjunction with «live» as a way of making it more emphatic. 6918 In contrast to those who wanted to kill as their spiritual progenitor did (8:40, 44), Jesus came to bring life (8:51; 10:10) from his Father. If they rejected him, however, they would «die in their sins» (8:21, 24). 5. Greater Than Ahraham (8:52–59) Jesus» interlocutors zealously assert their descent from Abraham (8:33), a claim which Jesus allows genetically (8:37) but challenges spiritually (8:39–44). The interlocutors conversely deny that Jesus is greater than Abraham (8:52–53); Jesus responds that he is not boasting (8:54–55), but that Abraham himself recognized Jesus» superiority (8:56), and that Jesus existed eternally before him (8:58)–a blatant assertion of deity which could not easily be misinterpreted (8:59). 5A. Assuming Abrahams Superiority (8:52–53) Jesus» hearers misunderstood (8:52), yet should have understood his words about not dying (8:51; for this being accepted language for death, see comment above on 8:51): some of Jesus» Hellenistic Jewish contemporaries could claim that those who conquer fleshly passions, like the patriarchs of old, do not die but live for God (4 Macc 7:18–19; cf. Matt 22:32). 6919 In one Jewish story possibly in circulation in some form by the time of the Fourth Gospel " s publication, Abraham refused to submit to the angel of death, requiring God to remind him that all the righteous before him, including the prophets, have died. 6920 Again, however, Jesus» adversaries misinterpret his words about death by construing him more literally than necessary (8:52; cf. 6:52).

http://azbyka.ru/otechnik/world/the-gosp...

206 E.g., Josephus Life 359–366. Of course, the events were freshest in a witness " s mind immediately after the events (Lysias Or. 20.22.160), but testimony within the generation was accepted. 207 E.g., Diogenes Laertius 1.23: «But according to others»; 6.1.13; 8.2.67–72; Plutarch Lycurgus 1.1; Philostratus Vit. soph. 1.21.516; 2.5.576; p. Sotah 9:13, §2. Historical distance also increased the possibility of gratuitous errors, as in 4 Macc 4(Antiochus Epiphanes was Seleucus " s younger brother rather than his son, but the mistake is understandable). 208 Cf. also Pausanias 9.31.7; Plutarch Isis 8; and Theon " s reasons for thinking the account of Medea murdering her children implausible (Progymn. 5.487–501; cf. 3.241–276, 4.112–116, 126–134). Arguments from probability and/or internal consistency had become standard (e.g., Demosthenes On the Embassy 120; Against Pantaenetus 23; Aristotle Rhet. 1.15.17,1376a; Dionysius of Halicarnassus R.A. 3.35.5–6; 11.34.1–6; Arrian Alex. 3.3.6; Josephus Ag. Ap. 1.219–220,267,286; 2.8–27, 82,148; Life 342, 350; Acts 26:8). 209 E.g., 1 Kgs 14:19, 29; 2 Kgs 23:28; 1 Chr 27:24; 29:29; 2Macc 2:24–25; Dionysius of Halicarnassus R.A. 1.6.1; Arrian Alex. 6.2A; Plutarch Alex. 31.2. Rabbis, too, emphasized citing sources for traditions (e.g., m. Abot 6:6; b. Nid. 19b). Even a novelist might occasionally remember to provide verisimilitude by providing a source (Apuleius Metam. 9.30). 210 E.g., Dionysius of Halicarnassus R.A. 1.87.4; 3.35.1–4; 8.79.1; Livy 9.44.6; 23.19.17; 25.17.1–6; Appian R.H. 11.9.56; 12.1.1; Plutarch Alex. 31.3; 38.4; Demosth. 5.5; 29.4–30.4; Them. 25.1–2; 27.1; 32.3–4; Apollodorus 1.4.3; 1.5.2; 1.9.15, 19; 2.3.1; 2.5.11; Ovid Fasti 6.1–2, 97–100; Philostratus Vit. soph. 2.4.570; Pausanias 2.5.5; 2.26.3–7; Arrian Alex. 4.9.2–3; 4.14.1–4; 5.3.1; 5.14.4; 7.14.2; 7.27.1–3; Herodian 7.9.4; 7.9.9; Cornelius Nepos 7 (Alcibiades), 11.1; 9 (Conon), 5.4; p. Sotah 9:13, §2; see further Livy in LCL 12n. 2. Occasionally historians also found ways to harmonize traditions (Diodorus Siculus 4.4.1–5). Outside history, see, e.g., Contest of Homer and Hesiod 323; Parthenius LR. 11.1–3; 14.5. Cf. Ovid " s account of Lichas " s end (Metam. 9.225), which diverges from Sophocles Trach. 777–782; he claims dependence on prior tradition, but his emphasis on metamorphoses certainly accounts for which tradition he prefers!

http://azbyka.ru/otechnik/world/the-gosp...

7719 M. Sank 6:2; t. Ber. 6:17; Kip. 4:8–9; " AbotR. Nat. 29; 39A; b. Ber. 60a, bar.; Sank 47b; Sebu. 13a; p. Sebu. 1:6, §5; Num. Rab. 8:5; Ecc1. Rab. 4:1, §1; hence posthumous stoning (b. Ber. 19a; p. Móed Qat. 3:1, §9; cf. Christian material in Sib. Or. 7.161–162) or suffering (Pesiq. Rab Kak 11:23). Cf. L.A.B. 25:6–7; 26:1; 27:15; on a corporate level, Jub. 30:14–17; 33:10–14; 41:26. 7722 PlatoAlc. 1:115–127; Greater Hippias 295E; Aristotle Rhet. 1.7.1,1363b; Seneca Benef. 4.5.1; 4.21.6; 7.8.2; Epictetus Diatr. 1.2.5–7; 1.6.6; 1.6.33; 1.18.2; 1.22.1; 1.28.5; 2.7.4; 2.8.1; 3.21.15; 4.7.9; 4.8.17; Marcus Aurelius 6.27; 9.1.1; Phaedrus 3.17.13; Diogenes Laertius 7.1.98–99; 10.150.31; 10.152.37; Sextus Empiricus Eth. 2.22; Theon Progymn. 8.45; Sir 37:28 ; 1Сог 6:12 . 7723 Retrospect provided the appropriate perspective on purported oracles (e.g., Aeschylus Agamemnon 1112–1113; Sophocles Oed. tyr. 439; Track 1169–1173; Plutarch Alex. 37.1; Lycophron Alex. 1–15; Apollodorus 2.8.2; 3.5.7; 3.15.6; Statius Thebaid 1.495–496; Virgil Aen. 6.98–101; Dio Cassius 62.18.4; Arrian Alex. 7.26.2–3; Xenophon Eph. 1.6–7; Philostratus Hrk. 15.2–3, 5; Josephus War 1.80). Misplaced political agendas could be held to distort the interpretations of oracles (Plutarch Lysander 22.5–6); for poetic license, cf. Ovid Metam. 15.823–824. 7724 E.g., Philip of Macedon (Diodorus Siculus 16.91.2–3); or the story of Croesus in Herodotus Hisf.1.46–48; 1.53.3; Maximus of Tyre Or. 5.2; Cyrus in Philostratus Hrk. 28.11–12; Hamilcar in Valerius Maximus 1.7.exf.8; cf. also Valerius Maximus 1.5.4; 1.8.10. 7725 E.g., Sophocles Oed. tyr. 717–725, 744–745, 788–797; Valerius Maximus 1.8.10; 1 Kgs 22:30, 34. 7726 E.g., Lucan C.W. 1.673–695; Dionysius of Halicarnassus R.A. 1.31.1; Pinero, «Inspiration»; other sources in Keener, Spirit, 21–26. 7727 Cf. Burkhardt, «Inspirationslehre,» who doubts that Philós view of inspiration was ecstatic possession; but this thesis is open to question (cf. Keener, Spirit, 24–25).

http://azbyka.ru/otechnik/world/the-gosp...

8296 E.g., 1Рет. 5:5 ; t. Meg. 3:24; c Abod. Zar. 1:19; 4 Bar. 5:20; Ps.-Phoc. 220–222; Syr. Men. 11–14, 76–93 (but cf. 170–172); Homer II. 1.259; 23.616–623; Aulus Gellius 2.15; Diodorus Siculus 1.1.4; 2.58.6; Pythagoras in Diogenes Laertius 8.1.22–23. 8300 Among philosophers, cf. Epicurus (Culpepper, School, 107, cites Lucretius Nat. 3.9); Epictetus Diatr. 3.22.82; Nock, Christianity, 30. 8302 E.g., Philostratus Vit. soph. 1.490; 1.25.536, 537; Iamblichus V.P. 35.250; 2 Kgs 2:12; 4 Bar. 2:4, 6, 8; 5:5; t. Sanh. 7:9; Matt 23:9; cf. Gen. Rab. 12(Simeon b. Yohai of the sages of Beth Hillel and Shammai); for Christian usage from the second to fifth centuries, see Hall, Scripture, 50. 8303 E.g., Ahiqar 96 (saying 14A); Sir 2:1 ; Did. 5.2; 1 John 2:1; cf. Babrius pro1.2; Babrius 18.15. This included astronomical and other revelatory wisdom (1 En. 79[esp. MS B]; 81:5; 82:1–2; 83:1; 85:2; 91:3–4; 92:1). 8304 E.g., Jub. 21:21; Tob 4:3,4, 5,12; 1Macc 2:50, 64; 1 En. 92:1; T. Job 1:6; 5:1; 6:1; T. Jud. 17:1; T. Reu. 1:3; T. Naph. 4:1; Pesiq. Rab. 21:6. 8305 E.g., m. B. Mesía 2:11; Ker. 6:9; Sipre Deut. 32.5.12; p. Hag. 2:1, §10; among Gentiles, Theon Progymn. 3. 93–97. 8307 Malina, Windows, 55. One may compare the frequent topic of unity in Greek speeches (e.g., Dionysius of Halicarnassus R.A. 7.53.1; Livy 24.22.17). Some characterized loving one another (φιλλληλους) as more naturally a rural phenomenon that could include sharing resources (Alciphron Farmers 29 [Comarchides to Euchaetes], 3.73, par. 2). 8308 Though Segovia, Relationships, 179, is correct that the Gospel, unlike 1 John, is involved in polemic with the synagogue rather than «intra-church.» 8309 «Commandment(s)» appears frequently in the Johannine Epistles (1 John 2:3–4, 7–8; 3:22–24; 4:21; 5:2–3; 2 John 4–6 ; cf. also Rev 12:17; 14:12); the commandment specifically concerns love (1 John 3:23; 4:21) and accurate faith (1 John 3:23). 8310 It was new in the sense of realized eschatology (1 John 2:8). The Johannine Epistles may employ «from the beginning» meaning «from the beginning of the gospel tradition,» however (1 John 2:24; 3:11; 2 John 6 ), perhaps as a double entendre with the beginning of creation (1 John 1:1; 2:13–14; 3:8).

http://azbyka.ru/otechnik/world/the-gosp...

6360 Cf. Germanicus " s praise in Dio Cassius 57.18.6; cf. Anderson, Glossary, 125 (citing Rhet. Ad Herenn. 4.63). 6361 E.g., Apollonius of Rhodes 1.307–311 ; 3.443–444. 6362 E.g., Pythagoras (Aulus Gellius 1.9.2; Iamblichus V.P. 17.71); 4Q185 1 2.7–8; 4Q186 1 1.5–6; 2 1.3–4; 4Q561. 6363 Homer I1. 3.167; Od. 1.207, 301; 3.199; 9.508; 10.396; Aristotle Rhet. 1.5.13, 1361b; Arrian Alex. 5.19.1; Plutarch Lycurgus 17.4; Chariton 2.5.2; Herodian 4.9.3; 6.4.4; Artapanus in Eusebius Praep. ev. 9.27.37. If the Shroud of Turin should prove authentic, however (see Borkan, «Authenticity»), it would testify that Jesus was, after all, perhaps a head taller than his contemporaries. 6364 Homer Od. 13.289; 15.418; 18.195; Plutarch D.V33, Mor. 568A; Longus 2.23; Achilles Tatius 1.4.5; Jos. Asen. 1:4–5/6–8; Pesiq. Rab Kah. 17:6. 6365 Agamemnon was a head taller than Odysseus, but the latter had a broader chest (Homer 17. 3.193–194) and is «tall» in Homer Od. 6.276; 8.19–20. Cf. Cornelius Nepos 17 (Agesilaus), 8.1. 6366 Malherbe, «Description,» comparing Augustus, Heracles, and Agathion. Some of the apparently unflattering features become conventional as early as Homer " s depictions of Odysseus; the «small of stature» observation (Acts Paul 3:3; Paul and Thecla 3) fits his Latin name (Paulus, small). 6367 Drury, Design, 29. 6368 Aristotle Po1. 3.7.3, 1282b; Rhet. 1.6.10, 1362b; Theon Progymn. 9.20; Jdt 8:7; 10:7; cf., e.g., Plato Charm. 158C; Chariton 2.1.5; 3.2.14; 5.5.3; 5.5.9; 6.1.9–12; 6.6.4; Athenaeus Deipn. 13.608F; Sir 36:22 ; t. Ber. 6:4; but cf. Plutarch Bride 24–25, Mor. 141CD; Prov 6:25; 31:30 ; Sir 9:8; 11:2; 25:21 . 6369 Sextus Empiricus Eth. 3.43 recognizes that various peoples defined beauty according to their own cultures. 6370 Homer Il. 1.197; Euripides E1. 515, 521–523; Hipp. 220, 1343; Iph. au1. 758, 1366; Here. fur. 993; Apollonius of Rhodes 1.1084; 3.829; 4.1303, 1407; Virgil Aen. 4.590; 10.138; Ovid Metam. 9.715. 6371 Homer Il. 19.282; Od. 4.14; Aristophanes BirdslU; Apollonius of Rhodes 2.676; Virgil Aen. 4.558; Ovid Metam. 11.165; Apuleius Metam. 5.22.

http://azbyka.ru/otechnik/world/the-gosp...

194 E.g., Thucydides 1.21.1; Livy 6.1.2–3; 7.6.6; Diodorus Siculus 1.6.2; 1.9.2; 4.1.1; 4.8.3–5; Dionysius of Halicarnasus RA. 1.12.3; Thucyd. 5; Pausanias 9.31.7; Josephus Ag. Ap. 1.15,24–25,58; cf. Bowersock, Fiction as History, 1–2. Some also considered the earlier period qualitatively different because of divine activities (Hesiod Op. 158–60, 165; Arrian Alex. 5.1.2), but others mistrusted its reports because of such unusual events (Thucydides 1.23.3). 195 Some, like the author of the Life of Aesop, may simply string together all the available popular traditions into a narrative. These traditions had grown over six centuries (see Drury, Design, 28–29). 196 Plutarch Theseus 1.3. Arrian accepts but explains on rationalistic grounds some old legends (Alex. 2.16.6). 198 E.g., demythologizing in Thucydides 1.21.1–2; Dionysius of Halicarnassus R.A. 1.39.1; 1.41.1 (cf. 1.84.4); Thucyd. 6; Philostratus Vit. soph. 2.1.554; recognizing how propaganda helped create legend (Arrian Alex. 4.28.1–2); applying a criterion of coherency with known customs of a report " s day (Dionysius of Halicarnassus R.A. 9.22.1–5); reporting stories as difficult to believe and recommending the reader " s use of discretion (Livy 4.29.5–6; 23.47.8); or examining chronological and other tensions within a text (Maclean and Aitken, Heroikos, il–1 [citing Philostratus Hrk. 23.5–6; 25.10–13]). 199 Arrian Alex. 7.14.4–6. The same criterion could apply, however, in fictitious composition or historical reconstruction based on plausibility (cf. Aristotle Poet. 15.4–5, 1454a; Theon Progymn. 1.46–52; 2.79–81; 8.2–3; in a history, see, e.g., Dio Cassius 62.11.3–4). 201 Aulus Gellius 10.12.8–10. Some could also caution readers not to be too skeptical of an account that otherwise appeared implausible (Sallust Cati1. 3.2; Plutarch Camillus 6.4). 202 E.g., Josephus Ant. 20.156–157; see more extensively Mosley, «Reporting,» passim. Even Josephus Life 336–339 attests to historians» concern for accuracy. 205 See Josephus Life 357; Ag. Ap. 1.45–49,56; War 1.2–3; Xenophon Hel1. 6.2.31 (refusing to believe a report until an eyewitness was available); Dionysius of Halicarnassus Thucyd. 7; Seneca Nat. 3.25.8; 4.3.1; Arrian Alex, 1.pref.2–3; 6.11.8; Cornelius Nepos 23 (Hannibal), 13.3; 25 (Atticus), 13.7; 17.1. Historians often preferred sources closer in time to the events reported (Livy 7.6.6; 25.11.20).

http://azbyka.ru/otechnik/world/the-gosp...

  001     002    003    004    005    006    007    008    009    010