56 armin d. baum
observed, most pleased the audience; the second prize to the person who
came next in their approval. aristophanes, however, when his opinion was
asked, voted that the first place should be given to the candidate who was
least liked by the audience. 7 When the king and all the company showed
great indignation, he rose and obtained permission to speak. amid a gen-
eral silence he informed them that only one of the competitors was a true
poet; the others recited borrowed works, whereas the judges had to deal with
original compositions, not with plagiaries. the assembly were surprised and
the king was doubtful. aristophanes relying upon his memory produced a
large number of papyrus rolls from certain bookcases, and comparing these
with what had been recited he compelled the authors to confess they were
thieves. the king then ordered them to be brought to trial for theft. they were
condemned and dismissed in disgrace, while aristophanes was raised to high
office and became librarian...
10 But this encyclopedia, your highness, is not presented under my own
name with the suppression of my authorities, nor have I set out to gain
approbation by vituperating any man’s ideas. for I owe great gratitude to all
those who with an ocean of intellectual services which they gathered from all
time, each in his department provided stores from which we, like those who
draw water from a spring and use it for their own purposes, have gained the
means of writing with more eloquence and readiness; and trusting in such
authorities we venture to put together a new manual of architecture.
11 Because, then, I observed that such beginnings had been made towards
the method of my undertaking, I drew upon these sources and began to go
forward...
Annotated Select Bibliography
the following select bibliography contains the major contributions to the
topic of pseudepigraphy as well as the most important recent publica-
tions, which I could not yet deal with in my monograph from 2001.77
Baum, armin d. “literarische echtheit als Kanonkriterium in der alten Kirche.” ZNW 88
(1997): 97–110.
the available evidence demonstrates that in the early church only books regarded as
literarily authentic were accepted into the biblical canon. the thesis defended by K.-h.
ohlig and n. Brox that literary authenticity was not a necessary criterion of canonicity
in the early church can only be maintained if literary authenticity and apostolic author-
ship are not clearly enough distinguished and if the distinction between necessary and
sufficient conditions is blurred.
——. Pseudepigraphie und literarische Fälschung im frühen Christentum: Mit ausgewählten
Quellentexten samt deutscher Übersetzung. Wunt 2.138. tübingen: Mohr siebeck, 2001.
the testimony of both direct and indirect sources confirms that in antiquity pseudepi-
graphical statements of authorship were considered attempts to deceive. It cannot be
77 Cf. Pseudepigraphie und literarische Fälschung, 263–92.