 | This articleneeds additional citations forverification. Please helpimprove this article byadding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. Find sources: "Pseudepigrapha" – news ·newspapers ·books ·scholar ·JSTOR(July 2018) (Learn how and when to remove this message) |
Apseudepigraph (alsoanglicized as "pseudepigraphon") is afalsely attributed work, a text whose claimedauthor is not the true author, or a work whose real author attributed it to a figure of the past. The name of the author to whom the work is falsely attributed is often prefixed with the particle "pseudo-",[1] such as for example "pseudo-Aristotle" or "pseudo-Dionysius": these terms refer to the anonymous authors of works falsely attributed toAristotle andDionysius the Areopagite, respectively.
Inbiblical studies, the termpseudepigrapha can refer to an assorted collection of Jewish religious works thought to be writtenc. 300 BCE to 300 CE. They are distinguished byProtestants from thedeuterocanonical books (Catholic and Orthodox) orApocrypha (Protestant), the books that appear in extant copies of theSeptuagint in the fourth century or later[2] and theVulgate, but not in theHebrew Bible or inProtestant Bibles.[3] TheCatholic Church distinguishes only between the deuterocanonical and all other books; the latter are calledbiblical apocrypha, which in Catholic usage includes the pseudepigrapha.[citation needed] In addition, two books considered canonical in theOrthodox Tewahedo churches, theBook of Enoch andBook of Jubilees, are categorized as pseudepigrapha from the point of view ofChalcedonian Christianity.[citation needed]
In addition to the sets of generally agreed to be non-canonical works, scholars will also apply the term to canonical works who make a direct claim of authorship, yet this authorship is doubted. For example, theBook of Daniel is considered by some to have been written in the 2nd century BCE, 400 years after the prophetDaniel lived, and thus the work is pseudepigraphic.[4][5] A New Testament example might be the book of2 Peter, considered by some to be written approximately 80 years afterSaint Peter's death. Early Christians, such asOrigen, harbored doubts as to the authenticity of the book's authorship.[6]
The term has also been used byQuranistMuslims to describehadiths: Quranists claim that most hadiths are fabrications[7] created in the 8th and 9th century CE, and falsely attributed to the Islamic prophetMuhammad.[8]
The wordpseudepigraph (from theGreek:ψευδής,pseudḗs, "false" andἐπιγραφή,epigraphḗ, "name" or "inscription" or "ascription"; thus when taken together it means "false superscription or title";[9] see the relatedepigraphy). The plural of "pseudepigraph" (sometimesLatinized as "pseudepigraphon" or "pseudepigraphum") is "pseudepigrapha".
When a text is shown to have been falsely attributed to a particular author, and the true identity of the author is not known, the author can be referred to by a combination ofpseudo- and the traditional authors name. For example, theArmenian History has been falsely attributed to an Armenian historian named seventh-centurySebeos, and it is therefore called Pseudo-Sebeos.[10]
Scholars have identified seven levels of authenticity which they have organized in a hierarchy ranging from literal authorship, meaning written in the author's own hand, to outright forgery:[11]
Inbiblical studies,pseudepigrapha refers particularly to works which purport to be written by noted authorities in either the Old and New Testaments or by persons involved in Jewish or Christian religious study or history. These works can also be written about biblical matters, often in such a way that they appear to be as authoritative as works which have been included in the many versions of the Judeo-Christian scriptures.Eusebius indicates this usage dates back at least toSerapion of Antioch, whom Eusebius records[12] as having said: "But those writings which are falsely inscribed with their name (ta pseudepigrapha), we as experienced persons reject...."
Many such works were also referred to asApocrypha, which originally connoted "private" or "non-public": those that were not endorsed for public reading in theliturgy. An example of a text that is both apocryphal and pseudepigraphical is theOdes of Solomon.[13] It is considered pseudepigraphical because it was not actually written by Solomon but instead is a collection of early Christian (first to second century) hymns and poems, originally written not in Hebrew, and apocryphal because they were not accepted in either theTanakh or theNew Testament.
There is a tendency not to use the wordpseudepigrapha when describing works later than about 300 CE when referring to biblical matters.[3]: 222–28 But the late-appearingGospel of Barnabas,Apocalypse of Pseudo-Methodius, thePseudo-Apuleius (author of a fifth-centuryherbal ascribed to Apuleius), and the author traditionally referred to as the "Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite", are classic examples of pseudepigraphy. In the fifth century the moralistSalvian publishedContra avaritiam ("Against avarice") under the name of Timothy; the letter in which he explained to his former pupil, Bishop Salonius, his motives for so doing survives.[14]
The term pseudepigrapha is also commonly used to describe numerous works of Jewish religious literature written from about 300 BCE to 300 CE. Not all of these works are actually pseudepigraphical. It also refers to books of the New Testament canon whose authorship is misrepresented. Such works include the following:[3]
Various canonical works accepted as scripture have since been reexamined and considered by modern scholars in the 19th century onward as likely cases of pseudepigraphica. TheBook of Daniel directly claims to be written by theprophet Daniel, yet there are strong reasons to believe it was not written until centuries after Daniel's death, such as references to the book only appearing from the 2nd century BCE onward. The book is an apocalypse wherein Daniel offers a series of predictions of the future, and is meant to reassure the Jews of the period that the tyrantAntiochus IV Epiphanes would soon be overthrown. By backdating the book to the 6th century BCE and providing a series of correct prophecies as to the history of the past 400 years, the authorship claim of Daniel would have strengthened a later author's predictions of the coming fall of theSeleucid Empire.[6][15]
Christian scholars traditionally maintain that nothing known to be pseudepigraphical was admitted to the New Testament canon.
The Catholic Encyclopedia notes,
The first four historical books of the New Testament are supplied with titles, which however ancient, do not go back to the respective authors of those sacred texts.The Canon of Muratori,Clement of Alexandria, andSt. Irenaeus bear distinct witness to the existence of those headings in the latter part of the second century of our era. Indeed, the manner in which Clement (Strom. I, xxi), and St. Irenaeus (Adv. Haer. III, xi, 7) employ them implies that, at that early date, our present titles to the gospels had been in current use for some considerable time. Hence, it may be inferred that they were prefixed to the evangelical narratives as early as the first part of that same century. That however, they do not go back to the first century of the Christian era, or at least that they are not original, is a position generally held at the present day. It is felt that since they are similar for the four Gospels, although the same Gospels were composed at some interval from each other, those titles were not framed and consequently not prefixed to each individual narrative, before the collection of the four Gospels was actually made. Besides as well pointed out by Prof. Bacon, "the historical books of the New Testament differ from its apocalyptic and epistolary literature, as those of the Old Testament differ from its prophecy, in being invariably anonymous, and for the same reason. Prophecies, whether in the earlier or in the later sense, and letters, to have authority, must be referable to some individual; the greater his name, the better. But history was regarded as common possession. Its facts spoke for themselves. Only as the springs of common recollection began to dwindle, and marked differences to appear between the well-informed and accurate Gospels and the untrustworthy ... become worth while for the Christian teacher or apologist to specify whether the given representation of the current tradition was 'according to' this or that special compiler, and to state his qualifications". It thus appears that the present titles of the Gospels are not traceable to the Evangelists themselves.[16]
However, agnostic biblical scholarBart D. Ehrman holds that only seven of Paul's epistles are convincingly genuine, and that all of the other 20 books in the New Testament appear to be written by unknown people who were not the well-known biblical figures to whom the early Christian leaders originally attributed authorship.[7] The earliest and best manuscripts of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John were all written anonymously.[17] Furthermore, the books of Acts, Hebrews, 1 John, 2 John, and 3 John were also written anonymously.[17]
ThirteenNew Testamentletters are attributed to Paul and are still considered by Christians to carry Paul's authority. These letters are part of theChristian Bible and are foundational for the Christian Church. Therefore, letters which some claim to be pseudepigraphic are not considered any less valuable to Christians.[18]
Authorship of 6 out of the 13 canonical epistles of Paul has been questioned by both Christian and non-Christian biblical scholars.[19] These are theEpistle to the Ephesians,Epistle to the Colossians,Second Epistle to the Thessalonians,First Epistle to Timothy,Second Epistle to Timothy, andEpistle to Titus. These six books are referred by sceptical scholars such as Bart Ehrman as "deutero-Pauline letters", meaning "secondary" standing in the corpus of Paul's writings, on the grounds of proposed evidence that they could not have been written by Paul, despite internal attribution to Paul. Those known as the "Pastoral Epistles" (Timothy, 2 Timothy, and Titus) are all so similar that they are thought to be written by the same unknown author, either by Paul or in Paul's name.[7]
Seven New Testament letters are attributed to several apostles, such asSaint Peter,John the Apostle, and Jesus's brothersJames andJude.
Three of the seven letters are anonymous. These three have traditionally been attributed toJohn the Apostle, the son of Zebedee and one of the Twelve Apostles of Jesus. Consequently, these letters have been labelled theJohannine epistles, despite the fact that none of the epistles mentions any author. Most modern scholars believe the author is not John the Apostle, but there is no scholarly consensus for any particular historical figure. (see:Authorship of the Johannine works).[20][21]
Two of the letters claim to have been written or issued bySimon Peter, one of the Twelve Apostles of Jesus. Therefore, they have traditionally been called thePetrine epistles. However, most modern scholars agree the second epistle was probably not written by Peter, because it appears to have been written in the early 2nd century, long after Peter had died. Yet, opinions on the first epistle are more divided; many scholars do think this letter is authentic.[22]
In one epistle, the author only calls himself James (ἸάκωβοςIákobos). It is not known which James this is supposed to be. There are several different traditional Christian interpretations of other New Testament texts which mention aJames, brother of Jesus. However, most modern scholars tend to reject this line of reasoning, since the author himself does not indicate anyfamilial relationship with Jesus. A similar problem presents itself with the Epistle of Jude (ἸούδαςIoudas): the writer names himself a brother of James (ἀδελφὸς δὲ Ἰακώβουadelphos de Iakóbou), but it is not clear which James is meant. According to some Christian traditions, this is the same James as the author of the Epistle of James, who was allegedly a brother of Jesus; and so, this Jude should also be a brother of Jesus, despite the fact he does not indicate any such thing in his text.[22]
TheGospel of Peter[23] and the attribution to Paul of theEpistle to the Laodiceans are both examples of pseudepigrapha that were excluded from the New Testament canon.[24] They are often referred to asNew Testament apocrypha. Further examples of New Testament pseudepigrapha include theGospel of Barnabas[25] and theGospel of Judas, which begins by presenting itself as "the secret account of the revelation that Jesus spoke in conversation with Judas Iscariot".[26]
TheVision of Ezra is an ancientapocryphal text purportedly written by the biblicalscribeEzra. The earliest surviving manuscripts, composed inLatin, date to the 11th century CE, although textual peculiaritiesstrongly suggest that the text was originally written inGreek. Like theGreek Apocalypse of Ezra, the work is clearly Christian, and features several apostles being seen inheaven. However, the text is significantly shorter than the Apocalypse.
TheDonation of Constantine is a forged Roman imperial decree by which the 4th-century emperorConstantine the Great supposedly transferred authority over Rome and thewestern part of theRoman Empire to thePope. Composed probably in the 8th century, it was used, especially in the 13th century, in support ofclaims of political authority by the papacy.[27]Lorenzo Valla, an ItalianCatholic priest andRenaissance humanist, is credited with first exposing the forgery with solidphilological arguments in 1439–1440,[28] although the document's authenticity had been repeatedly contested since 1001.[27]
In Russian history, in 1561 Muscovites supposedly received a letter from thePatriarch of Constantinople which asserted the right ofIvan the Terrible to claim the title ofTsar. This, too, turned out to be false.[29] While earlier Russian Monarchs had on some occasions used the title "Tsar", Ivan the Terrible previously known as "Grand Prince of all the Russias" was the first to be formally crowned as Tsar of All Rus (Russian:Царь Всея Руси). This was related to Russia's growing ambitions to become an Orthodox "Third Rome", after theFall of Constantinople – for which the supposed approval by the Patriarch added weight.[30][31]
TheAnaphorae ofMar Nestorius, employed in theEastern Churches, is attributed toNestorius, but its earliest manuscripts are in Syriac, which question its Greek authorship.[32][33]
TheZohar (Hebrew:זֹהַר, lit. Splendor or Radiance), foundational work in the literature of Jewish mystical thought known asKabbalah,[34] first appeared inSpain in the 13th century, and was published by a Jewish writer namedMoses de León. De León ascribed the work toShimon bar Yochai ("Rashbi"), arabbi of the 2nd century during the Roman persecution[35] who, according to Jewish legend,[36][37] hid in a cave for thirteen years studying the Torah and was inspired by theProphetElijah to write the Zohar. This accords with the traditional claim by adherents that Kabbalah is the concealed part of theOral Torah. Modern academic analysis of the Zohar, such as that by the 20th century religious historianGershom Scholem, has theorized that de León was the actual author, as textual analysis points to a Medieval Spanish Jewish writer rather than one living in Roman-ruled Palestine.
Conrad Celtes, a notedGermanhumanist scholar and poet of theGerman Renaissance, collected numerous Greek and Latin manuscripts in his function as librarian of the Imperial Library in Vienna. In a 1504 letter to the Venetian publisherAldus Manutius[38] Celtes claimed to have discovered the missing books ofOvid'sFasti. However, it turned out that the purported Ovid verses had actually been composed by an 11th-century monk and were known to theEmpire of Nicaea according toWilliam of Rubruck. Even so, many contemporary scholars believed Celtes and continued to write about the existence of the missing books until well into the 17th century.[39]
Pseudepigraphy has been employed as ametafictional technique. Authors who have made notable use of this device includeJames Hogg (The Private Memoirs and Confessions of a Justified Sinner),Thomas Carlyle (Sartor Resartus),Jorge Luis Borges ("An Examination of the Works of Herbert Quain"; "Pierre Menard, Author of the Quixote"),Vladimir Nabokov (Pale Fire),Stanislaw Lem (A Perfect Vacuum;Imaginary Magnitude)Roberto Bolaño (Nazi Literature in the Americas) andStefan Heym (The Lenz Papers).
Edgar Rice Burroughs also presented many of his works – including the most well-known, theTarzan books – as pseudepigrapha, prefacing each book with a detailed introduction presenting the supposed actual author, with Burroughs himself pretending to be no more than the literary editor.J.R.R. Tolkien inThe Lord of the Rings presents that story andThe Hobbit as translated from the fictionalRed Book of Westmarch written by characters within the novels. The twelve books ofThe Flashman Papers series byGeorge MacDonald Fraser similarly pretend to be transcriptions of the papers left by an "illustriousVictorian soldier", each volume prefaced by a long semi-scholarly Explanatory Note stating that "additional packets of Flashman's papers have been found and are here presented to the public". A similar device was used byIan Fleming inThe Spy Who Loved Me and by various other writers of popular fiction.
The consensus of modern biblical scholarship is that the book was composed in the second century B.C., that it is a pseudonymous work, and that it is indeed an example of prophecy after the fact.
This article incorporates text from a publication now in thepublic domain: Gigot, Francis (1913)."Gospel and Gospels". In Herbermann, Charles (ed.).Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton Company. Jacobs, Joseph; Broydé, Isaac (1901–1906)."Zohar". InSinger, Isidore; et al. (eds.).The Jewish Encyclopedia. New York: Funk & Wagnalls.
| Methodology |
| ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Topics |
| ||||||
| Related | |||||||
