dating: if you love me as I love you: we know what

't Allermooiste
aan de mens is onze veelzijdigheid
naast al die andere levensvormen van planten & dieren
die we hebben leren kennen gedurende ons korte bestaan &
de sprong in 't heelal
die we ondernemen
...

The question of actual chronologies
is important here, too. This is a highly significant question for the problematic these stories address,
& beyond it, as well.

In order to ask questions of context, we have
to have some mode of establishing the relative synchronicity (or not)
of given pieces of textual evidence.

Not infrequently,
the protocols of dating differ between the different disciplines or fields
between which the comparison or contextualization
is to be carried out.

For the rabbinic texts
our guide established the principle:
The simple rule should be followed that the Talmud may serve as a good historic document
when it deals in contemporary matters within its own locality.

The legendary portions of the Talmud can hardly be utilized for this purpose.

The Palestinian Talmud
(and some of the early midrashim)
whose material was produced in the third & fourth centuries contains valuable information regarding Palestine
during that period.

It embodies many elements similar to those contained in the so-called documentary papyri.

The evidence is all the more trustworthy since the facts are often recorded incidentally & casually.

The rabbinic literature has much in common with the non-literary papyri & the inscriptions.

Thus we have accordingly
learned certainly that rabbinic legends cannot be taken as historically reliable sources
vis-a-vis the events that they purport to recount, & a legend, for these purposes, has to be defined as any narrative
for which the only sources we have are in texts produced hundreds of years
after the "events!"

In spite of the presumptions of certain more recent schools to have introduced this caveat into rabbinic historiography,
now we see that it was articulated several decades earlier.

Our first principle is not substantially different from that articulated by later ones,
who held that documents are to be taken as evidence for their own chronotope, & not for the one(s) reported on within them.

In contrast to this position vis-a-vis rabbinic narratives,
after much debate & discussion in the last centuries, church historians have generally resolved that some of the documents
of early martyrology preserved in Eusebius (and elsewhere) can be relied upon, by and large,
as virtually contemporaneous with the events that they relate,
in spite of the fact that we know of them also
as they are embedded in later texts.

This remains, however,
a highly ambiguous conclusion: an example of the acta of Polycarp is instructive.

As has been put with respect to another martyrology,

EVEN IF NOTHING CALLS INTO QUESTION THE BASIC FACTS,
IT IS UNCERTAIN HOW FAR THESE NARRATIVES HAVE BEEN ALTERED IN RETELLING THROUGH THE THIRD CENTURY?

THE SAME WOULD APPEAR
TO BE THE CASE FOR POLYCARP. THE EARLIEST SOURCE FOR POLYCARP'S MARTYROLOGY, ACCORDING TO MANY,
IS APPARENTLY NONE OTHER THAN EUSEBIUS, ONCE MORE A CLOSE CONTEMPORARY
OF THE TIME OF THE WRITING OF THIS MIDRASH
AND OF THE PALESTINIAN TALMUD.

MUCH CURRENT OPINION,
EVEN NOW, HOLDS THAT THE FORM OF THE TEXT IN EUSEBIUS IS LESS INTERFERED WITH,
& THUS ALSO "EARLIER," THAN THE FORM OF THE TEXT IN PSEUDO-PONIUS.

WE MUST THEREFORE ASK OURSELVES: what
have scholars meant by an authentic account?

By what criteria are the labels "authentic" and "inauthentic" affixed?

It is extremely doubtful whether any of the "canonized" acts is completely "authentic," if by "authentic" is meant
"the original, unedited account!"

It is also doubtful that we possess the original text of any letter written by an eyewitness,
or the text of an initially edited
commentarius.

In
transmitting
acta Christianorum,
martyrologists, from the earliest times it would appear, often, perhaps even usually,
did not resist the temptation to edit!

PERHAPS THE COMMUNITY OF SCHOLARS DEFINES
AN "AUTHENTIC ACCOUNT" AS A TEXT THAT IS NOT NECESSARILY THE HISTORICAL ORIGINAL
BUT IS DEMONSTRABLY DERIVED FROM A HISTORICAL ORIGINAL.

IF SO,
AUTHENTICITY IS A MATTER
OF DEGREE
...

It is only a matter of degree
whether the community of scholars calls such a text
"a fifth-century text that has been edited in the fifth century."

IF TEXTS ARE TREATED AS "WHOLES," WITHOUT
REGARD FOR EDITORIAL LAYERS & THE DATING THEREOF,
THE DANGER OF INCORRECTLY RECONSTRUCTING HISTORY FROM ANACHRONISTIC DATA
IS GREAT
...
This is especially true
when discussions of origins
are involved!

Kortom,
genoeg 'for the time being'?!

't Blijven interessante vragen & antwoorden die
ons 'begeesteren' van jongs af aan 'till the day we die':
zowel 't z.g. 'oude' als 'nieuwe' testament & alles wat daarna nog verder 't licht zag
in [ver]woord[ing] & [ge]schrift, hervertelling & -vertaling gaat zowel over
wat men dacht & voelde in de tijd dat 't ontstond
als over datgene wat we er nu & hier
nog aan hebben
...

't Naast elkaar leggen
van zowel ontstaansgeschiedenis
als alle daaropvolgende stages van constructie &
interpretatie blijft 't interessantste
wat de mens heeft voortgebracht
aan 'inzicht' in & 'uitzicht'
op onszelf &
elkaar.

Speciaal
als we ook nu
kunnen nagaan wat de invloed was
van de omstandigheden die leidden tot
hun schepping & de invloed die zij uitoefenden
op alles waarmee zij in aanraking werden gebracht: liefde
is & blijft 'n kwestie van menselijke{r} associaties,
interpretaties, connecties &
gevolgtrekkingen.

Boeken
die ons innerlijk &
uiterlijke leven invullen
zijn niet 'zomaar' 'n toevallig product
van 'n bepaalde tijd net zo
min als zij 't zogenaamde
'woord van G d' zijn:
ze zijn
ZOWEL
dat als veel meer dan dat alleen
~
tussen-posities
al met al
blijken 't meest te boeien
als we de diverse ontstaans- &
[re]constructiemomenten doen
herleven tot in de
allerkleinste
details?

Bij gebrek
aan voldoende data
moeten we 't doen met fragmenten
maar dat maakt 't daarom nog niet minder interessant,
boeiend & 'bepalend' voor ons korte bestaan & de
gevolgen daarvan 'op de
lange duur'.

Slaap zacht,
droom zoet & tell us all about it
if you really want to
do so:
ik wacht nog even
op de eerste sneeuwvlokjes
van zaterdagochtend & verheug me
op de witte wereld.

Alles heeft een plaats
& tijd onder de zon totdat ook die
ooit zal ophouden met schijnen en wij ons elders
zullen bevinden naar we misschien [zo nu & dan]
nog wel geloven
& hopen?

Die tijdreismomenten
tussen oerbronnen & spirituele rivieren-
delta's geven zin aan ons bestaan:
elk moment heeft 'n eigen waarde
in de tussentijd op
iedere plaats
...

:-)
:-}