Anthony Le Donne proposed a topic about Tatian and social memory (here, here, and here). I believe that the use of social memory is one of the most important and innovative concepts in Historical Jesus studies. I am unsure — as of yet — how this may play into second century Christianity. But it would seem I did not think it through just yet.
Chris Keith, “Big Daddy Pain,” has a response up here. He brings in the vile arch-heretic, almost as archy and heretical as Calvin, Marcion. Keith’s explanation is one worth considering as his his final suggestion. On the blog post. Linked just above. Why aren’t you reading that one?
I would call this memory manipulation, especially next to Marcion; although I reserve the right to consider that all literary events (new word ® — Mark is an event; Luke is a composition) as ideological to the core, even the Gospels — even Mark engaged in manipulating memory. So, I guess it would be social memory at work.
Although by the time you get to Marcion and Tatian, you are talking about manipulating a social memory of tradition, so maybe second or third hand. Thus we arrive back to were we started.
Anyway, if you are not a Scholar who blogs, because you find no reason in it, consider this dialogue and read my SBL paper: From Blogging to Book – SBL Paper.