Philip S. Alexander (editor), Armin Lange (editor), Renate J. Pillinger (editor) · 2010 · PDF · Calibre ID 6896
Resurfaced in Rewarded for the Relics (2026-10-12).
Role in the triad
Deep-time anchor and theory: Galen’s market, Serapion’s pseudepigrapha, Genette’s second degree; Smolak’s Seneca–Paul chapter as test case
Why this book
Supplies the market theory of forgery (Galen) and its rebuttal (Lange: ancient attribution as cultural memory, not fraud), plus the Seneca–Paul letters, which anticipate both modern cases: anachronism as tell, translator as alibi.
Quotations
Verified against the book’s own text on the day of the reading.
- “Before the inauguration of kings in Alexandria and in Pergamon, who competed with each other in gathering old books, there was not a work with a faked title” (Galen via Lange, p. 3 [PDF 18])
- “In contemporary scholarship, pseudepigraphy is regarded as the ascription of a literary work to another author by way of title, content, or tradition.” (Lange, p. 4 [PDF 19])
- “the tendency for authors not to ‘assert’ their composition, but rather to attribute it to a prestigious antecedent.” (Loprieno via Lange, p. 7 [PDF 22])
- “Another trait of the corpus is the reference to historical events from the fictional time of composition, a well known phenomenon in literary forgery” (Smolak, p. 226 [PDF 241])
- “It was not considered that the latter wrote in Greek, so that the linguistic flaws could be blamed on the translator.” (Smolak, p. 228 [PDF 243])
- “literature in the second degree does not effect cultural forgetting by way of replacement but rather gives them a new function, a new lease of life.” (Lange, p. 40 [PDF 55])
Themes
anachronism · Assmann · cultural memory · Galen · Genette · paratext · pseudepigraphy · Seneca–Paul · Serapion · translator as alibi